wasnt satan one of gods angels or summit? the he got banned. sooooo, god being all knowing, knew this would happen, so why did god create him?
why did "god" create "satan"
First of all, convince me there's a God. Secondly, I heard rumor that it was God's brother.
I really don't know; this puzzles me as well.
My only guess is that to truly have free will, we had to have an alternitive to God's guidance.
Another question I have is why are we made in such a way that we intrinsicly want to sin? Sure, there's original sin, but why does that have to carry over to us? We didn't do anything before we were born to deserve that.
My only guess is that to truly have free will, we had to have an alternitive to God's guidance.
Another question I have is why are we made in such a way that we intrinsicly want to sin? Sure, there's original sin, but why does that have to carry over to us? We didn't do anything before we were born to deserve that.
If you look at it from the persecutive it make sense, in Judaism Satan is not a rebel or a rival of God, Satan come from a Hebrew word meaning adversary or accuser. If you look at the book of Job you can understand this more. Satan in Judaism is the accuser or adversary of humans not God and his purpose is to basically test people.
In the Chrsitanperspectiv, it dose not make sence.
In the Chrsitanperspectiv, it dose not make sence.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| If you look at it from the persecutive it make sense, in Judaism Satan is not a rebel or a rival of God, Satan come from a Hebrew word meaning adversary or accuser. If you look at the book of Job you can understand this more. Satan in Judaism is the accuser or adversary of humans not God and his purpose is to basically test people.
In the Chrsitanperspectiv, it dose not make sence. |
It doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense from that perspective either. God is love and yet he allows this being to... "test" us? By making it hard to avoid temptation and deception away from the "true path" and introducing infinite suffering as the penalty?
No matter what way you slice it, if God is good and infinitely powerful, there should be no reason for Satan and/or evil and/or suffering to exist.
^Except perhaps free will.
However, I don't want to get into an argument based on that; as I said before, I don't really understand it.
However, I do believe that one day (probably long after I die), after the second coming of christ, I'll find out what happened to Lucifer, and I'll say, "Oh, so that's why..."
However, I don't want to get into an argument based on that; as I said before, I don't really understand it.
However, I do believe that one day (probably long after I die), after the second coming of christ, I'll find out what happened to Lucifer, and I'll say, "Oh, so that's why..."
There should be balance in the world.
| S3nd K3ys wrote: |
| First of all, convince me there's a God. Secondly, I heard rumor that it was God's brother. |
What did it for me was "white water river rafting". I was on this level 4 river, insane for a big begineer like me. I just took in the moments floating down this canyon. There were dear drinking on the bank and mountains on all sides of us as we floated along, the sky was crystal blue.
Some things just do not walk into exsistence. I guess at that moment is when I learned "faith". My faith is my belief in something that I can not prove. Oddly enough that makes it all the better.
A good break down though is the make up of the human geonome, something on a celluar level that has thousands of intricate moving parts to it. Something like that does not evolve from dust on the sea floor ? Our science still can not explain it, so who's to say it is not divine in nature.
Oh and from books that I have read I think Satan was God's second in command amongst the angels and found the power of the throne overwhelming and tried to seize the power for himself, when cast down to the pitt the books say he took a 3rd of all the angels with him. Now that would have been a battle to see.
The God of the old testament laying down the thunder.
Sorry I get ranty
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| ^Except perhaps free will.
However, I don't want to get into an argument based on that; as I said before, I don't really understand it. However, I do believe that one day (probably long after I die), after the second coming of christ, I'll find out what happened to Lucifer, and I'll say, "Oh, so that's why..." |
If God was loving, and he allowed free will, then there would be no suffering by default, but i would be allowed to choose it. As it is, no one can choose not to suffer. Even the most faithful suffer (case in point: Job).
If God is all powerful, then suffering can only exist if he wants it to exist, regardless of whether Satan exists or why. And if God wants suffering to exist, and certainly if he wants Satan to exist to tempt us into eternal suffering, then he cannot be good.
Therefore, if you accept that God is good and all-powerful, Satan as "enemy of humanity, not enemy of God" still makes no sense.
Free will is not a theological panacea.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| I really don't know; this puzzles me as well.
My only guess is that to truly have free will, we had to have an alternitive to God's guidance. |
The problem 'why did God create Satan' is exactly the same problem as 'why did God create us sinful'. It seems a bit weird, as He could create as well perfect human beings that would love everyone and everything, would never make anyone suffer or lead wars, and would live exactly the way a human being should live. Wonerful idea, isn't it? But in such a case, we would be only puppets, nothing more.
In my opinion He treats us seriously, that's why He wanted to give us the opportunity to make our own decisions. Even though He knew, we wouldn't agree with Him in everything. Even though He knew, that not following his tips we would do harm to ourselves and the others. Even though He knew, that we will continuously ignore Him, offend Him, intentionally turn away from Him and do exactly the opposite of His will. He left us perfect advices what to do to be truly happy in our lifes, but didn't want to force us to do so. He would love us to choose Him in our lifes, but He leaves it as our choice. This is what I would call the perfect love.
[EDIT]: Whoaaa, I almost forgot. What does it all has to do with Satan? Satan is a spiritual being, similar to us, but not having a material body. And he [or maybe there are plenty of them] is the one that chose to turn away from God once and for all. And God accepted his decision as He accepts our decisions. That's all.
God gives us (and Satan too, I suppose) free will, because only with free will can love be genuine.
Suppose you have a little pull-string toy that says 'I love you' when you pull it's string. That's not really love. Why? Because the toy cannot choose not to love you. (Also because it's just a toy, and is incapable of love, but I hope you get the point). Now suppose you have a child that says they love you. That is really love.
My theory on this is that we have to have another option, and that God knows that without any alternative to Him, we would still be no better to Him than that little pull-string toy. (This may also explain why He allows Himself to not be believed in and why He provides scientific explanations to nearly everything.)
Suppose you have a little pull-string toy that says 'I love you' when you pull it's string. That's not really love. Why? Because the toy cannot choose not to love you. (Also because it's just a toy, and is incapable of love, but I hope you get the point). Now suppose you have a child that says they love you. That is really love.
My theory on this is that we have to have another option, and that God knows that without any alternative to Him, we would still be no better to Him than that little pull-string toy. (This may also explain why He allows Himself to not be believed in and why He provides scientific explanations to nearly everything.)
Heh, you wrote exactly the same as me, but in different words 
Well, yes, but I wanted to point out why He takes us seriously and gives us free will.
| Indi wrote: | ||
It doesn't make a whole hell of a lot of sense from that perspective either. God is love and yet he allows this being to... "test" us? By making it hard to avoid temptation and deception away from the "true path" and introducing infinite suffering as the penalty? No matter what way you slice it, if God is good and infinitely powerful, there should be no reason for Satan and/or evil and/or suffering to exist. |
Thats if God is omnibenevolent and omniscient, when you read the bible he is clearly nether.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
|
Thats if God is omnibenevolent and omniscient, when you read the bible he is clearly nether. |
eh? Examples please.
(Fakenesis 9:24 and ______ confessed his sins unto the Lord, and the Lord replied, "Whoa! That's a shock. I didn't know about that one! I hate you now.")
I am inclined to think he exists just as part of some balance out there. Look at some of the philosophies out there like the Yin and Yang or as mentioned in an earlier post the Adversary role in Judaism. Maybe its just to keep us all in line or something, most religions believe in a sort of hell or at least some sort of reduced standing in the after-life. So in a sense that the devil seems to be a symbol and spokesperson for the ultimate evil its held up as a model of what not to do unless of course you are a satanist, although I believe even mainstream satanists (despite the inherent contradiction of general mainstream views) aren't purely evil persons but that they just advocate a philosophy of ruthless self-gratification at all costs or at least thats how I understand it.
| ocalhoun wrote: | ||
eh? Examples please. (Fakenesis 9:24 and ______ confessed his sins unto the Lord, and the Lord replied, "Whoa! That's a shock. I didn't know about that one! I hate you now.") |
| Exodus 6:2-3 wrote: |
| I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name the LORD I did not make myself known to them. |
| Gen 15:7 wrote: |
| And he said unto him, I [am] the LORD that brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it. |
I guess someone has amnesia or is a liar.
| ocalhoun wrote: | ||
eh? Examples please. (Fakenesis 9:24 and ______ confessed his sins unto the Lord, and the Lord replied, "Whoa! That's a shock. I didn't know about that one! I hate you now.") |
Omnibenevolence: See old testament. There allot of examples of people killing in the name of God and God ordering people to kill in the old testament. The plegs of Egypt which cause immense suffering and death to the people of Egypt something the Pharaoh didn't care about especially after God hardened his hart, the Israelites conquest of there "promised land", Sadam and Gemora and many more.
Omniscient: Adam and Eve, they ate the fruit and he didn't won't them to, Gods testing of Abraham.
Omniscient; that just means that He knows everything, not that He controls everything. Adam and Eve had free will.
As for omnibenevolent, at that time, the Jewish people were His chosen people, and He was doing what was good for them. I'm not sure about the why's of that.
As for omnibenevolent, at that time, the Jewish people were His chosen people, and He was doing what was good for them. I'm not sure about the why's of that.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| God gives us (and Satan too, I suppose) free will, because only with free will can love be genuine.
Suppose you have a little pull-string toy that says 'I love you' when you pull it's string. That's not really love. Why? Because the toy cannot choose not to love you. (Also because it's just a toy, and is incapable of love, but I hope you get the point). Now suppose you have a child that says they love you. That is really love. My theory on this is that we have to have another option, and that God knows that without any alternative to Him, we would still be no better to Him than that little pull-string toy. (This may also explain why He allows Himself to not be believed in and why He provides scientific explanations to nearly everything.) |
Suppose you made an intelligent doll and put it in a room where it couldn't see you. You have designed the room to be self-consistent, so that, when it is examined by the doll it appears to be completely self-contained and logical, so that everything in the room and the room itself seems to exist without you, and there is no physical evidence that you exist at all.
The only evidence of your existence that you leave for this doll is a vague and self-contradictory document written in several languages - languages which you then allow to be altered almost beyond recognition and/or die off completely. To further complicate matters, you include in that document several absurd and farcical stories that defy anything the doll has ever observed, such as conjuring snakes, and about events that history should have recorded but doesn't, such as infanticide across entire civilizations (two cases!).
Now your doll has to make a choice:
1.) Trust in the alternately vague, absurd and outright false document, trying to explain away the difficult parts of it, and have faith in you and everything you've said, even though it has no real evidence that you even exist.
2.) Trust in its own senses (which you have given it!) to analyze its own surroundings and see that, other than that silly document, there is no evidence of your existence (as you planned!), and that the universe seems to work fine without you (the way you made it!).
3.) Believe that there is something else out there... but not you, because your document is vague, contradictory and absurd. Rather, it should assume that there is something else out there, but it can't be whatever is described in that document. Therefore, whatever wrote that document is either unaware of the true nature of what is out there... or deliberately trying to confuse you... perhaps implying that the real good guy is Satan, and the "god" that wrote the book is attempting to paint him in a negative portrait in order to draw you away from him.
Now, as you have planned it, there is only one right choice, and more than one wrong one. And if your doll makes the wrong choice, it gets punished for an eternity.
Are you a good creator?
As for the free will argument - apologists love to throw out "free will" as the reason bad things happen, but it really doesn't work, you know.
Posit a universe with a truly benevolent and omnipotent god, that honestly wants its creations to love it by their own free will.
First question: would such a god, if it were rational at all, hide their existence from its creations? If so, to what end? If the goal is to be worshipped by its creations... what rational reason could it have to hide?
Second question: would such a god create and allow pain and suffering? If so, to what end? If the goal is to show your creations that you're worthy of their love and worship... why torment them (or allow them to be tormented, which is the same thing when you're omnipotent)?
Third question: if said creations chose not to love the god... would such a god punish them infinitely? Or simply, at the least, just end their existence completely?
Fourth question: if an interloper entered said universe and ****** it up for everyone else - introducing pain and suffering, and tricking them into turning away from the creator in order to increase the chance of them having to be eternally punished... wouldn't a good god destroy the interloper? (And if the argument is that the god is too good to simply destroy the interloper, why can't an infinitely powerful god do something to render the interloper harmless without destroying him?)
Common apologist logic is that the existence of free will absolves God of responsibility for what happens in his creation. Bull. He is infinitely powerful, and all-knowing. Nothing happens that he is not aware of, before during and afterwards - and nothing happens that he does not want to happen. Everything that happens happens either because he directly caused it to happen, or because he indirectly caused it to happen by not stopping it (or simply by creating a universe where it would happen). Infinite power means infinite responsibility. Everything evil that happens is God's fault. That includes everything Satan does.
Well it kinda becomes hard to follow on from what Indi wrote down. The logic there is certainly well explained.
This is truly an unsual thing. Christianity basically developed from Judaism. Yet the concept of satan as a test more than an adversary was abandoned. Could the reason behind this change in mentality be due to the belief that it was because of the Jews causing the death of Jesus? If they would strike down the son of the lord, then surely there are in league with something that opposes him? Who could possibly be against the lord, perhaps satan is not around to test us, but is actually an advesary?
| Quote: |
| The Conspirator wrote
If you look at it from the persecutive it make sense, in Judaism Satan is not a rebel or a rival of God, Satan come from a Hebrew word meaning adversary or accuser. If you look at the book of Job you can understand this more. Satan in Judaism is the accuser or adversary of humans not God and his purpose is to basically test people. In the Chrsitanperspectiv, it dose not make sence. |
This is truly an unsual thing. Christianity basically developed from Judaism. Yet the concept of satan as a test more than an adversary was abandoned. Could the reason behind this change in mentality be due to the belief that it was because of the Jews causing the death of Jesus? If they would strike down the son of the lord, then surely there are in league with something that opposes him? Who could possibly be against the lord, perhaps satan is not around to test us, but is actually an advesary?
| Indi wrote: |
| First question: would such a god, if it were rational at all, hide their existence from its creations? If so, to what end? If the goal is to be worshipped by its creations... what rational reason could it have to hide? |
God does not hide. God as the artist of His universe signs His art work. Humans who carry the attitude of, "I have the things I have because of me," are blind to this and therefore miss God in creation and then resort to alternative explinations of their own about the things around them.
| Indi wrote: |
| Second question: would such a god create and allow pain and suffering? If so, to what end? If the goal is to show your creations that you're worthy of their love and worship... why torment them (or allow them to be tormented, which is the same thing when you're omnipotent)? |
A consequience of someone's actions whether fault is in the direction an indiviual, some governing authority or someone else's fault who suppresses suffering upon a group of people. God has chosen people, out of all other created beings, do His will on earth, if you choose to do so.
| Indi wrote: |
| Third question: if said creations chose not to love the god... would such a god punish them infinitely? Or simply, at the least, just end their existence completely? |
"if said creations chose not to love the god ... " then these said creations have chosen to reject God, and thus chosen to there own path themselves.
| Indi wrote: |
| Fourth question: if an interloper entered said universe and ****** it up for everyone else - introducing pain and suffering, and tricking them into turning away from the creator in order to increase the chance of them having to be eternally punished... wouldn't a good god destroy the interloper? (And if the argument is that the god is too good to simply destroy the interloper, why can't an infinitely powerful god do something to render the interloper harmless without destroying him?) |
God has chosen to let the "interloper" exist. Again you under estimate the power of choice. By allow such an "interloper" to exist is to only serve as a test of our faithfulness to what is true.
Hope this helps
____________________
www.socialoutcast.co.nr
we cannot have one with out the other. THey are co-dependent agents that without one, the other would cease to exist. THink about it. If we did not know evil, would good hold meaning?
It isn't till after we have seen and experienced both good and evil (and all humanity is in between with both in their soul) that we can appreciate either.
THere needs to be a balance of opposites for reality, humanity, and spirituality to exists otherwise there would be no existance to speak of, everyone would be pure and self sacrificing. The garden of eden story is there to tell us that we need the knoweldge of evil to truly appreciate the good. We also need the knowledge of good to understand evil. Again they are co-dependent states of mind where one cannot exist without the other.
It isn't till after we have seen and experienced both good and evil (and all humanity is in between with both in their soul) that we can appreciate either.
THere needs to be a balance of opposites for reality, humanity, and spirituality to exists otherwise there would be no existance to speak of, everyone would be pure and self sacrificing. The garden of eden story is there to tell us that we need the knoweldge of evil to truly appreciate the good. We also need the knowledge of good to understand evil. Again they are co-dependent states of mind where one cannot exist without the other.
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| God does not hide. God as the artist of His universe signs His art work. Humans who carry the attitude of, "I have the things I have because of me," are blind to this and therefore miss God in creation and then resort to alternative explinations of their own about the things around them. |
OK, so let me get this straight.
With this ideology, man deserves NO credit whatsoever for any good that he does, but he does get full blame for all wrong.
The delicious food that you eat comes straight from God, and the chef shall not expect to be paid unless he "carries the attitude" that it was him who made it.
And yet - God will make him suffer if he were to poison your food.
So in the end, the foolish man, with his "attitude", shall get no rewards or happiness - only punishments and suffering.
The rewards are not for him to claim, the guilt is not for him to disown.
I'm sure such ideology keeps the man very happy and satisfied indeed.
You've got to love people who solemnly claim that it is God who creates babies - and yet they marry, and when the time comes, they rush to a hospital to get a doctor to oversee the delivery.
Those who claim that they have no power to create anything and yet demand payment in exchange of their work.
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| God has chosen to let the "interloper" exist. |
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| to only serve as a test of our faithfulness to what is true. |
Ah ! What a whimsical fellow.
Instead of using his powers to render us incapable of disloyalty, he decided to make a prime-time game show out of it.
I don't know about the millions, but a discreet set of natural phenomenons is a more convincing explanation for the direction of life.
The idea of an indulgent being, who does things "just for the heck of it", ruling life is just plain crafty.
As if designed to suppress human tendency to seek answers and explanations.
Any man seeking answers will eventually have the door of "God's will" slammed shut on his face.
But I can see why millions subscribe to this indulgent being - it's so damn easy and blissful.
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| A consequience of someone's actions whether fault is in the direction an indiviual, some governing authority or someone else's fault who suppresses suffering upon a group of people. God has chosen people, out of all other created beings, do His will on earth, if you choose to do so. |
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| Again you under estimate the power of choice. By allow such an "interloper" to exist is to only serve as a test of our faithfulness to what is true. |
Accusing someone of underestimation ?
But you, my friend, contradict the very definition of "choice".
With your own definition of God and devil, choosing between God and Devil (God and his creation) is like choosing to be enslaved by either the King or by his minister.
That's not a choice, but only an illusion of choice. (unless you come up with an alternative definition of "power of choice" as well)
However, choosing to be a slave to either, or to be free - is power of choice.
Maybe you "choose" to deny knowing it. But it does come out unintentionally -
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| "if said creations chose not to love the god ... " then these said creations have chosen to reject God, and thus chosen to there own path themselves. |
I believe that God created Satan to balence the world with good and evil 
, even if He prefers good. Not this: 
EVIL!!!!!!!!!!!
Indi, you good a unique avatar. Haven't seen it b4
See yall later
May Satan bless you! (just kidding)
, even if He prefers good. Not this: EVIL!!!!!!!!!!!
Indi, you good a unique avatar. Haven't seen it b4
See yall later
May Satan bless you! (just kidding)
It is not for us to question God's workings.
However, the old sayings does say, The Lord works in mysterious way
Plus, Satan couldn't be God's brother, God was the only One before the Creation, so he couldn't have a brother.
Also,
I will not convince anyone that there is a God. I've tried before and 98% of atheists are to stubborn to listen.
I will say, if anyone believes in evolution, who put those DNA strands into beings?
However, the old sayings does say, The Lord works in mysterious way
Plus, Satan couldn't be God's brother, God was the only One before the Creation, so he couldn't have a brother.
Also,
I will not convince anyone that there is a God. I've tried before and 98% of atheists are to stubborn to listen.
I will say, if anyone believes in evolution, who put those DNA strands into beings?
| Tyler wrote: |
| I will not convince anyone that there is a God. I've tried before and 98% of atheists are to stubborn to listen. |
I can see why your arguments don't convince an atheist, who's used to seeking answers -
Talking of atheism -
| Tyler wrote: |
| I will say, if anyone believes in evolution, who put those DNA strands into beings? |
Talking of theism -
| Tyler wrote: |
| It is not for us to question God's workings. |
You fully expect atheism to be answerable, yet your own premises close down on logic when you talk of theism.
The only thing that validates theism is the negation of the need of a proof.
Theists hold their beliefs true unquestioningly, never feeling the need for answers.
Any attempt at seeking an answer is swiftly closed down with isms like "It is not for us to question".
That much can be understood.
What I don't understand is their attempts to refute theories that were borne out of logical hypotheses, by citing lack of evidence!
| Tyler wrote: |
| I will say, if anyone believes in evolution, who put those DNA strands into beings? |
The idea that some person or being is responsible for creation is theism, not evolution.
| Tyler wrote: |
|
Also, I will not convince anyone that there is a God. I've tried before and 98% of atheists are to stubborn to listen. I will say, if anyone believes in evolution, who put those DNA strands into beings? |
And do you really should convince anyone? I think you'd better let anyone believe in what he wants and respect this choice. I never try to convince anyone, and I hope no one will try to do something like this to me. All I do is to tell everybody about my opinions, and that's all. I discovered that beyond hypocrisy and fanatism of many Christians, there is the amazingly wonderful true message of Christianity, and that live the way the Christ says is really beautiful and worth living. That's all. Think about it;)
| xalophus wrote: |
|
Ah ! What a whimsical fellow.
Instead of using his powers to render us incapable of disloyalty, he decided to make a prime-time game show out of it. |
Thats the point right there! Do you want to be incapable of disloyalty? And if we were incapable of disloyalty, what would our loyalty mean? Nothing!
By the way, I just love the "quotes" in the topic's title.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| Omniscient; that just means that He knows everything, not that He controls everything. Adam and Eve had free will. |
He would not only have known that they would eat the fruit before hand he would know the exact time and how it would have happen thus we could have taken steps to prevent it like placing a guard, getting rid of the snake or (the smart thing) move the tree to somewhere they can get to it. And after they did it he punished them and all human kind for it.
What a puzzle this seems to be, and yet how simply it is solved!
To answer the many questions here... 1st of all, God did not create evil. When Satan was first brought forth from God's creative hands he was good. Satan has not existed eternally, he was created.
Revelation 12:7 - 9(NASB):
7 And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. And the dragon and his angels waged war,
8 and they were not strong enough, and there was no longer a place found for them in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.
This I believe is the clearest account of Satan's activities before being cast down that I know of in the Scripture. We know it was Satan, in the form of a serpent, that tempted Eve in the garden of Eden. 1 Chron. 21:2 says that Satan was responsible for causing David to commit sin. Job 1:6-12 and 2:1-7 we see the activity of Satan in tempting Job.
He is called Satan,
The Devil (Mt. 13:39);
the Dragon (Rev. 12:3);
Beelzebub (Matt. 10:25);
Belial (2 Cor. 6:15);
and Lucifer in the KJV in Isa. 14:12.
He is referred to as the Evil One (Matt. 13:19);
the Tempter (Matt. 4:3);
The god of this world (age) (2 Cor. 4:4);
the Ruler of the kingdom of the air (Eph. 2:2);
the prince of this world (Jn. 12:31).
Two passages that are often used to teach about Satan are Ezekiel 28:11-19 and Isaiah 14:12-14. Both of these passages should be used with extreme caution.
One should always be aware of the context of a Biblical passage before trying to teach anything from it. In its context Ezek. 28:11-19 is a description of the King of Tyre. To go beyond this in explaining this passage is to go without biblical support. NEVER in Scripture is the context in Ezek. 28 used to speak of Satan.
Similarly, Isa. 14:12-14 speaks of the king of Babylon. The KJV adds "Lucifer" to verse 12 for unknown reasons. Isa. 14 is speaking in figurative language of the downfall of the nation of Babylon.
It could be said in both these passages that the King of Tyre and the King of Babylon were the very personification of Satan. In this case we can assume that certain characteristics of these evil kings are characteristics of Satan.
What we do know about Satan is this. He was a created being, an angel, who was judged because of his rebellion, which the New Testament hints was sparked by his pride (1Tim.3:6). He is the one responsible for introducing evil to this world. Now he desires to devour God's creation by tempting man to reject his Creator.
This is then the lesson we must learn. Satan--an angel created by God--was given the free will to choose whether or not he would obey God. He disobeyed, and that disobedience was evil.
Satan made himself evil by choosing to do evil.
In the same way, humans may choose to do right or wrong, and through their choices, evil flourishes.
So... it was choice that caused Satan to be evil, not an act of Creation.
To answer the many questions here... 1st of all, God did not create evil. When Satan was first brought forth from God's creative hands he was good. Satan has not existed eternally, he was created.
Revelation 12:7 - 9(NASB):
7 And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging war with the dragon. And the dragon and his angels waged war,
8 and they were not strong enough, and there was no longer a place found for them in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.
This I believe is the clearest account of Satan's activities before being cast down that I know of in the Scripture. We know it was Satan, in the form of a serpent, that tempted Eve in the garden of Eden. 1 Chron. 21:2 says that Satan was responsible for causing David to commit sin. Job 1:6-12 and 2:1-7 we see the activity of Satan in tempting Job.
He is called Satan,
The Devil (Mt. 13:39);
the Dragon (Rev. 12:3);
Beelzebub (Matt. 10:25);
Belial (2 Cor. 6:15);
and Lucifer in the KJV in Isa. 14:12.
He is referred to as the Evil One (Matt. 13:19);
the Tempter (Matt. 4:3);
The god of this world (age) (2 Cor. 4:4);
the Ruler of the kingdom of the air (Eph. 2:2);
the prince of this world (Jn. 12:31).
Two passages that are often used to teach about Satan are Ezekiel 28:11-19 and Isaiah 14:12-14. Both of these passages should be used with extreme caution.
One should always be aware of the context of a Biblical passage before trying to teach anything from it. In its context Ezek. 28:11-19 is a description of the King of Tyre. To go beyond this in explaining this passage is to go without biblical support. NEVER in Scripture is the context in Ezek. 28 used to speak of Satan.
Similarly, Isa. 14:12-14 speaks of the king of Babylon. The KJV adds "Lucifer" to verse 12 for unknown reasons. Isa. 14 is speaking in figurative language of the downfall of the nation of Babylon.
It could be said in both these passages that the King of Tyre and the King of Babylon were the very personification of Satan. In this case we can assume that certain characteristics of these evil kings are characteristics of Satan.
What we do know about Satan is this. He was a created being, an angel, who was judged because of his rebellion, which the New Testament hints was sparked by his pride (1Tim.3:6). He is the one responsible for introducing evil to this world. Now he desires to devour God's creation by tempting man to reject his Creator.
This is then the lesson we must learn. Satan--an angel created by God--was given the free will to choose whether or not he would obey God. He disobeyed, and that disobedience was evil.
Satan made himself evil by choosing to do evil.
In the same way, humans may choose to do right or wrong, and through their choices, evil flourishes.
So... it was choice that caused Satan to be evil, not an act of Creation.
Yes, I agree totally with everything you said, and I'm not trying to argue; I would really just like a real answer to this:
Given what you said, and the fact that God is omniscient, God had to have known that Lucifer would rebel before He created him. Why then, did God create him anyway?
I should ask my pastor.
Given what you said, and the fact that God is omniscient, God had to have known that Lucifer would rebel before He created him. Why then, did God create him anyway?
I should ask my pastor.
I thought the Christan doctrine said God created everything.
| The Conspirator wrote: |
| I thought the Christan doctrine said God created everything. |
He did; what are you getting at there?
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| God does not hide. |
Either you're lying about that, or your bible is.
(Hint: start with Matthew. No i won't give you the verse or chapter. If you're a responsible theist, you should be know the most important text in the entire world inside and out. Am i the only one that finds it depressing that the average North American Christian can quote entire Simpsons episodes verbatum, but are almost completely clueless about what the bible actually says?)
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| God as the artist of His universe signs His art work. |
Orly? Then, please, point out his signature. Show me where there is a sign that proves God's existence without a shadow of a doubt - where there is a blazing "GOD IS HERE" written down that cannot be explained by any other possible means other than that it must have been done by God.
No, don't bother really. Because i already know there is no such signature. And God said there would not be in the bible (which means, again, if you say that it is possible to prove God's existence, either you're lying or he is).
How about we play a little divinely inspired game? i have placed my "signature" in this image. Find it. You have one hour, at the end of which you will be horribly killed.
The inspiration for that game comes from a divine source! i've just scaled it down a little. In God's version, his signature is hidden somewhere in the entire known universe, a sphere of around 156 billion light years in diameter - which gives you around 6.23 × 10⁸³ m³, roughly, and of course, that's assuming that you only have to search the physical universe, and not things like art and philosophy, and even time for that matter. He gives you around 70 years max (give or take) to find it, and if you fail, you suffer for an eternity.
The clock is ticking.
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| Humans who carry the attitude of, "I have the things I have because of me," are blind to this and therefore miss God in creation and then resort to alternative explinations of their own about the things around them. |
Hm, i'm a human, more or less. And i don't "carry the attitude" that i "have" the sun "because of me". i also don't "carry the attitude" that i have air to breathe and food to eat "because of me". i "carry the attitude" that i have these things because of phyical mechanisms that exist without awareness or intelligence. i carry that attitude because i can observe, measure, predict and reproduce those processes, so, clearly they exist. Am i blind for seeing what clearly exists, but nothing else? If you look at a picture of a square and a circle, and you see a square and a circle, are you blind? If you looked at the same picture and saw a square, a circle and a triangle... isn't it your perception that is suspect, not mine?
If God really intended for us to be able to find him - which one would assume he would if he really intends to be worshipped, and he is not just playing a sadistic game with us - why did he create these "alternative explinations"? To hear you describe it, we're pulling these "alternative" explanations out of our collective asses, but clearly we're not. With these "alternative" explanations, we can not only explain a great deal of what goes on around us (and the amount we can explain increases every day!), but we can make predictions and apply our "alternative" explanations for practical uses. The computer you used to reply to me? Yeah. That's a byproduct of "alternative" explanations made by people who are "blind". Works pretty well for a flight of fancy doesn't it?
If God really wanted us to know that he exists... then why does the universe seem to work just fine without him? Why can't we see some indisputable sign that he exists? And before you say something evasive like "even if you saw such a sign, you would dispute it", let me point out that, so far, the dispute arguments WORK. If Bernoulli was "blind" why do planes fly... unless God is deliberately hiding his handiwork, to make it look like Bernoulli was right and God is not involved at all. And if so, why?
| socialoutcast wrote: | ||
A consequience of someone's actions whether fault is in the direction an indiviual, some governing authority or someone else's fault who suppresses suffering upon a group of people. God has chosen people, out of all other created beings, do His will on earth, if you choose to do so. |
Most of your response makes no sense, grammatically or otherwise, so i don't really know how to respond.
| socialoutcast wrote: | ||
"if said creations chose not to love the god ... " then these said creations have chosen to reject God, and thus chosen to there own path themselves. |
And you think that's an answer?
Don't you agree that a punishment should fit a crime? If someone committed a crime, and you punished them in a manner that is equivalent to the crime, you're a fair person, right? If someone committed a crime and you punished them in a manner that is less severe than the crime itself, you're a merciful person, right? And if someone committed a crime and you punished them far more severely than the crime warranted, you would be... what? A cruel person, wouldn't you? If someone cut in front of you in line and you set them on fire, you'd be a horribly cruel person, wouldn't you?
So, consider this. We are not infinitely powerful. We do not live for an infinitely long amount of time. So it is impossible for us to do an infinite amount of evil. And yet, God promises us infinite torment if we don't do things his way. Finite evil earns infinite punishment. Is that right? Of course not. But your only answer is "well, if you choose to do wrong you deserve whatever you get".
Seriously, try a little harder.
| socialoutcast wrote: |
| God has chosen to let the "interloper" exist. Again you under estimate the power of choice. By allow such an "interloper" to exist is to only serve as a test of our faithfulness to what is true. |
And you underestimate omnipotence.
Let me put it this way. If i chose to put a gun to my head and pull the trigger, what will happen? Most likely, i'll die, yes - especially if i bite the barrel? Am i guaranteed to die? No. i might live. Who decides whether i live or die? God does, right?
Ok, so i can choose whatever i want, but God determines what happens in the end. Agree?
So now, consider Satan. He has chosen to defy God. Fine and good. It was his choice and he made it. But who decides whether his defiance will be effective? Who decides whether he actually survives the walk from the house where he decided to defy God to the place where he tempts his first person away from God? God does.
At any time, God could stop Satan, AND IT WOULD NOT DEFY FREE WILL TO DO SO. Satan and evil do not exist because of free will. They exist because God wants them to. Which means God wants us to suffer, and God wants evil. And God wants someone to fool us into not worshipping him. And, furthermore, he wants this person to succeed more often than not, because he has given us no solid evidence that he exists, but has made the universe look like it doesn't need him, and made his own holy document vague and questionable.
Which kinda makes the entire theology unravel at the seams, really.
Why does it matter?
Perhaps it's something that God does not want us mortals to know. Perhaps it is something beyond our recognition, beyond our ability to put it under a microscope and poke at it.
My theory is this:
God needed evil to contrast His good, otherwise it wouldn't matter if people believed in God or not. There needed to be a place to go, motivation, if you will, to believe in God. God knew that we had to prove our love like He loves us, then we go to Heaven.
So when Lucifer (ironically, God's favorite and most trusted angel) rebelled against God, God took the opportunity for this creation of Hell - a contrast to His good and righteousness.
That's only my 2 cents.
Perhaps it's something that God does not want us mortals to know. Perhaps it is something beyond our recognition, beyond our ability to put it under a microscope and poke at it.
My theory is this:
God needed evil to contrast His good, otherwise it wouldn't matter if people believed in God or not. There needed to be a place to go, motivation, if you will, to believe in God. God knew that we had to prove our love like He loves us, then we go to Heaven.
So when Lucifer (ironically, God's favorite and most trusted angel) rebelled against God, God took the opportunity for this creation of Hell - a contrast to His good and righteousness.
That's only my 2 cents.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Why does it matter? |
There are dozens and dozens of reasons. I'm frankly shocked that you can even seriously ask that question. Here are just a few.
First, the practical. There is a resurgence of power in North America of borderline fanatic christian groups, both in the US and Canada. These groups are gaining more political power now than they have had in decades. Even more moderate christian groups are flexing political muscle and using legal means to force their will on non-believers. The news is full of examples, ranging from changing textbooks to teach creation rather than evolution, to putting the ten commandments in front of courthouses - and of course, efforts to legislate against things like abortion, stem cell research and gay marriage. If a christian movement is afoot to assert control of the law, then it is the responsibility of everone who doesn't want to acquiesce to christian rule to put a stop to that movement forthwith. One of the most direct tactics for preventing certain laws for being made is to show that those laws are illogical/unethical/absurd. We're doing that, certainly, but there is another, more effective method - showing that the ideology behind the entire body of such laws is flawed. It's the difference between trying to stop a fire by putting out the flames as they flare up, or stopping it by removing the fire's fuel source. By showing that the foundations of christian morality are absurd and illogical, maybe we can stop absurd and illogical laws from being made (and maybe, just maybe, get the existing absurd and illogical laws off the books). Thus we question the tenets of the ideology. And whenever we question them to the point that believers throw up their hands and say something like:
| Tyler wrote: |
| It is not for us to question God's workings. |
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Perhaps it's something that God does not want us mortals to know. |
Next, the intellectual: obviously i don't believe that God exists, but i can't deny that the bulk of our modern world is built on a foundation that includes that belief. So, being the person that i am, the person that wants to understand how the world - physical and human - actually works, i want to understand the underpinnings of this ideology that has had such a profound impact on my world. Don't you? Don't you want to understand God? Oh, sure, you probably never will, but don't you want to try? Thus, we ask questions and seek answers.
And finally, the personal: Are you really comfortable with blind faith? Don't you want to know that your faith is well-founded? i question my (lack of) faith every day. i challenge my assumptions with relish, and i happily consider christianity and other religions as alternatives and measure them up against my own beliefs (or lack thereof). i consider these questions seriously because if christianity is "correct", then good grief, i want to know. Do you really think you're strengthening the case for your religion by saying "just stop asking questions - what's the point anyway"? If not, then why do you say such things?
There are essentially three star characters in christianity. God, Jesus and, yes, Satan. You can take away Abraham, Moses, the thirteen disciples, Mary and all the rest of the supporting cast. It's really about those three. This question is powerful and fundamental, because it puts two of those characters under scrutiny, and at a very fundamental level.
That's why it matters.
If you don't want your beliefs questioned, that's fine. But i, and i assume many of the others here, do want to ask those questions. You have no right to tell us that we are wrong to. So if you're only goal here is to tell us to "shut up and believe", i question the propriety of your participation.
i also question the legitimacy of it. If you seriously think that we're wrong to ask these questions - to seek answers - then isn't it hypocritical of you to reap the benefits of people who have dared to question in the past? All of the conveniences of modern life, including the computer you're using now, exist because someone said "well if it isn't God that makes (lightning/static/whatever) work... then what is it", and then sought out the answer, and applied what they learned to make new devices. Someone said "how do the birds fly", then someone else said "what does it matter? you know god put them there, so just accept that they fly because that's what he wants them to do" and the first person was not satisfied with that answer. Thus came progress. If you really believe that asking such questions has no real benefit... isn't it hypocritical of you to be basking in the benefits given by people that asked such questions before?
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Perhaps it's something that God does not want us mortals to know. Perhaps it is something beyond our recognition, beyond our ability to put it under a microscope and poke at it. |
Why did he give us the ability to ask questions, and the desire to want the answers, if we just aren't supposed to have them? Just to watch us squirm?
| Soulfire wrote: |
| My theory is this:
God needed evil to contrast His good, otherwise it wouldn't matter if people believed in God or not. There needed to be a place to go, motivation, if you will, to believe in God. God knew that we had to prove our love like He loves us, then we go to Heaven. |
To say: "God needed evil to contrast..." is a form of "God needed X to do Y", which is a form of "God could not do Y without X", which is immediately invalid.
If God is omnipotent, then any statement of the form: "God could not anything" is not valid. Omnipotence implies there is nothing God cannot do.
Thus your theory fails, given the assumption that God is omnipotent.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| So when Lucifer (ironically, God's favorite and most trusted angel) rebelled against God, God took the opportunity for this creation of Hell - a contrast to His good and righteousness. |
From which comes the conclusion that God created hell. Following the logic, and remembering that God is omniscient and omnipotent, that means that God was aware that Lucifer would rebel and let it happen. Which leads to the next conclusion, that God wanted Lucifer to rebel, and thus he wanted evil and hell to exist.
So, essentially, God created all evil and suffering.
The thing is, as much as apologists want to deny this conclusion, you can arrive at it by a dozen different methods, which is a pretty sure sign that it's correct. And now, back to your original question: why does it matter? It matters because if you're actually serious about wanting to understand God and your ideology, then given that the above conclusion falls out of so many different theological tracks, you should be considering the next logical question. Doing that would lead to the next phase of your understanding of christianity and of God, and maybe help you get closer to him, and to the truth.
Isn't that what you want?
| ocalhoun wrote: | ||
Thats the point right there! Do you want to be incapable of disloyalty? |
Do you really want to pretend that you have free choice when you actually don't ?
My point was, why did God create pitfalls for his beloved creations when he could have very well ensured their eternal happiness.
| ocalhoun wrote: |
| And if we were incapable of disloyalty, what would our loyalty mean? Nothing! |
Will it not be true peace on earth if we all loved each other?
Will it not be good if not a single evil thought ever occured to any of us?
No?
Is that not, as every religion claims, what God wants?
| Indi wrote: |
| i also question the legitimacy of it. If you seriously think that we're wrong to ask these questions - to seek answers - then isn't it hypocritical of you to reap the benefits of people who have dared to question in the past? All of the conveniences of modern life, including the computer you're using now, exist because someone said "well if it isn't God that makes (lightning/static/whatever) work... then what is it", and then sought out the answer, and applied what they learned to make new devices. Someone said "how do the birds fly", then someone else said "what does it matter? you know god put them there, so just accept that they fly because that's what he wants them to do" and the first person was not satisfied with that answer. Thus came progress. If you really believe that asking such questions has no real benefit... isn't it hypocritical of you to be basking in the benefits given by people that asked such questions before? |
Have you read "Atlas shrugged" by Ayn Rand ?
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Perhaps it's something that God does not want us mortals to know. Perhaps it is something beyond our recognition, beyond our ability to put it under a microscope and poke at it. |
I love the "perhaps" even in your denial of reasoning.
Refusing even to try to find out doesn't make the question go away.
You think you know what you believe when the ultimate source of your "knowledge" is the unknown - the unknown which you vehemently refuse to try to probe and find out.
The only reason you hold your belief - is your belief that it's beyond reason.
No wonder then that whenever one questions such belief, the first casualty is his right to question and to know.
Uhm, Im not a very religious person, but Ive studied some of this stuff on my own and it really depends because according to the Christian religion Satan is a fallen angel, Gods sort of enemy (but God doesnt destroy/remove him because Satan is usefull to God or atleast thats how I understand it). Even though Im a satanist, the "Church of Satan" satanist, so I dont really believe in Satan himself but in the "rules" of satanism which I deemed to be better than for me than others.
As for Satan, I think it could also be that people really, really needed a balance in things, so if theres the loving God, there has to be hating Satan, you know what I mean, the balance between good and evil, because most people like to see things as black and white, good or evil, instead of trying to see them the way they really are.
(My 2 cents and sorry for any sp mistakes).
As for Satan, I think it could also be that people really, really needed a balance in things, so if theres the loving God, there has to be hating Satan, you know what I mean, the balance between good and evil, because most people like to see things as black and white, good or evil, instead of trying to see them the way they really are.
(My 2 cents and sorry for any sp mistakes).
| Quote: |
| First, the practical. There is a resurgence of power in North America of borderline fanatic christian groups, both in the US and Canada. These groups are gaining more political power now than they have had in decades. Even more moderate christian groups are flexing political muscle and using legal means to force their will on non-believers |
So, this part of the post has nothing to do with anything now. Onto the next.
| Quote: |
| The news is full of examples, ranging from changing textbooks to teach creation rather than evolution, to putting the ten commandments in front of courthouses - and of course, efforts to legislate against things like abortion, stem cell research and gay marriage. If a christian movement is afoot to assert control of the law, then it is the responsibility of everone who doesn't want to acquiesce to christian rule to put a stop to that movement forthwith. |
We shouldn't be taught evolution unless we're exposed to both sides of the argument. Evolution cannot be proven, much like creationism, so why is it that we are only taught one side of an argument? Aren't we supposed to be "well rounded"? Creationism is not just a Christian thing, and that's now how it should be taught. Creationism is believed (in some way or another) by at least half of the world.
The 10 Commandments are some of the fundamental laws of society, their place is in a courthouse. Putting them in a courthouse doesn't mean that everyone follows them, nor does it force people to follow them. Why don't you protest about the statues of Muhammed and Jesus in the Supreme Court. Can you say obsessive much?
So, what can we say? Our legislators have good morals. (Don't even being to argue with me about the word good, this isn't the time nor place). Gay marriage, stem cell research, and abortion is not only a Christian doctrine, so therefore you cannot simply say it is this "Christian" movement.
And yet, still nothing about Satan. *Waits*
| Quote: |
| Don't you? Don't you want to understand God? Oh, sure, you probably never will, but don't you want to try? Thus, we ask questions and seek answers. |
| Quote: |
| And finally, the personal: Are you really comfortable with blind faith? Don't you want to know that your faith is well-founded? |
Not understanding why God created Satan is hardly blind faith. I know my faith is well rounded. I'm not twisting peoples' arms saying "Believe."
Okay, I could go through and defend my theory - but you've failed to prove it wrong in my opinion. God created all evil, yes.
Do you know why He created the evil?
Take a look at yourself - you represent a part of the population that is clearly disobedient to God.
There needed to be punishment for disobedience. Therefore, we live in this fallen limbo half ass hell/heaven world.
Simply put, it's our human nature and disobedience to God that put God in the mood to create evil.
It wasn't intended to be like this, but it is.
I dont believe in god or satan! but if they were realy i think satan would be evil brother
| xalophus wrote: |
| Have you read "Atlas shrugged" by Ayn Rand ? |
No, i can't be arsed. Too fricken long. But i have lived the frustration. Do you know what it's like to deliver a shipment of food to a hospital camp in a war zone, then hear people saying it was thanks to "god" that they food came? "God" didn't pay for the food. "God" didn't figure out how to package it for safe travel across thousands of kilometers. "God" didn't load the food onto the planes. "God" didn't fly it over. "God" didn't repackage it onto trucks. "God" didn't drive the trucks through an active war zone, risking the chance either side or even just random bandits might break the cease fire and attack the convoy, or that we might just hit a mine or something. And "God" didn't manage the handouts and keep the crowds orderly. People did. People that worked their asses off, and occasionally risked their damn lives.
*shrug* It's just frustrating to hear people saying that people are really just sad and pathetic "sinners", capable of nothing without divine providence, and that it's really thanks to "god" that the world works. Because it's not. And while it's an amusing fantasy to believe that one day those of us who actually do make the world work might just pitch up and walk away, leaving it to go to hell in a handbasket, the fact is that i never could. i care too much about the world to ruin it just to spite the ignorant.
| Soulfire wrote: | ||
|
Persecution of homosexuals. i could have just pointed out that i gave no less than three examples in the very next sentence that you did not quote - for reasons i can't imagine. But this one example serves well.
There is no non-religious reason to deny homosexuals marriage. None. Nada. Zip. The major psychological and psychiatric professional associations across North America have stated that there is no reason why gay marriages would be bad for the couple, or for the children, if any (http://www.apa.org/releases/gaymarriage.html, for example). There are also no valid social, economic, political, legal, practical or moral reasons why such marriages should not be allowed, once you remove bigotry from the equation. And of course, the primary source of said bigotry... is religious. What segment of the demographic is it that is denying gays marriage? It's virtually entirely - almost completely - religious groups that oppose it, isn't it?
That's where the hell i got the idea that religion is being forced on non-believers, taking away their freedoms.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| So, this part of the post has nothing to do with anything now. Onto the next. |
On the contrary. That part of the post was part of the paragraph pointing out that religious nuts can and do try to force non-believers to bend to their will. You can't seriously deny that that doesn't happen, especially in the last few years in America. Maybe you don't, but there are religious activists that do, and they are actively trying to get laws in place to enforce their religious standards on non-believers. In order to challenge those people, we challenge their beliefs - and everytime we corner them on some facet of their beliefs, we hold them back just a little while longer. Thus we discuss questions like the one in this thread.
But all that is just repeating myself. You would have found the answers to pretty much every challenge you posed in your reply if you read more than two or three sentences at a time.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| We shouldn't be taught evolution unless we're exposed to both sides of the argument. Evolution cannot be proven, much like creationism, so why is it that we are only taught one side of an argument? Aren't we supposed to be "well rounded"? Creationism is not just a Christian thing, and that's now how it should be taught. Creationism is believed (in some way or another) by at least half of the world. |
There are no two sides to the argument. There is no argument. The theory of evolution is science. Creationism is not. Science is taught in schools. Religion is taught in churches. Unless the class is analyzing a religion academically, it shouldn't be taught in a school.
If the sheer number of people that "believe" something were a valid measure for what should be taught, then there should be classes on astrology. Most people believe that the toilet water swirls different ways in different hemispheres... in other words, just because the majority believes it, doesn't make it valid.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| The 10 Commandments are some of the fundamental laws of society, their place is in a courthouse. Putting them in a courthouse doesn't mean that everyone follows them, nor does it force people to follow them. Why don't you protest about the statues of Muhammed and Jesus in the Supreme Court. Can you say obsessive much? |
Their place is in a church. The 10 commandments are more certainly not some of the "fundamental laws of society". Only like two or three are even laws today.
i'm obsessive? i'm not the one trying to put up monuments of my religion everywhere around me. i would never dream of demanding that they put up a statue of James Randi at a YMCA.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| So, what can we say? Our legislators have good morals. (Don't even being to argue with me about the word good, this isn't the time nor place). Gay marriage, stem cell research, and abortion is not only a Christian doctrine, so therefore you cannot simply say it is this "Christian" movement. |
The gay marriage issue is entirely religious. The others have some secular ethical issues, but the vast majority of the opposition is religious. The religous objections have no place in lawmaking, because religion has no place in the government. (Which, funny enough, was how America was devised in the first place: "we need more lighthouses than churches", remember?) Therefore, the religious objections should be removed first, then the secular issues addressed. Considering questions like this thread's is how we begin that process.
But again, all this was already explained, if you'd bothered to read it.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| And yet, still nothing about Satan. *Waits* |
No, you asked why the question matters, so i explained why the question matters. There is no point in answering the question if you don't even think it matters. So i explained why the question matters.
| Soulfire wrote: | ||
|
Maybe we can find an answer, maybe not. But if you don't want to stop debate, you should probably come up with a more constructive introductory statement than "why does it matter?".
| Soulfire wrote: | ||
Not understanding why God created Satan is hardly blind faith. I know my faith is well rounded. I'm not twisting peoples' arms saying "Believe." |
No, but suggesting that even asking the question is a waste of time is blind faith that it is. Because no one really knows whether or not the question is a waste of time, which is why we ask it.
| Soulfire wrote: |
| Okay, I could go through and defend my theory - but you've failed to prove it wrong in my opinion. God created all evil, yes.
Do you know why He created the evil? Take a look at yourself - you represent a part of the population that is clearly disobedient to God. There needed to be punishment for disobedience. Therefore, we live in this fallen limbo half ****** hell/heaven world. Simply put, it's our human nature and disobedience to God that put God in the mood to create evil. It wasn't intended to be like this, but it is. |
If God is all powerful, then there is no way the world can be a way that he didn't intend. If God is omniscient, then he knew exactly what he was creating from the start, so there is no way we could have changed his mind.
He didn't make me powerful enough to defeat him did he? He didn't make me able to walk away and exist without having to worship him or suffer eternally. So he didn't give me much "free choice" at all. Blaming Satan for everything is a neat sleight of hand, but in the end, everything, including my disobedience, is God's fault.
| Quote: |
| He didn't make me powerful enough to defeat him did he? He didn't make me able to walk away and exist without having to worship him or suffer eternally. So he didn't give me much "free choice" at all. Blaming Satan for everything is a neat sleight of hand, but in the end, everything, including my disobedience, is God's fault. |
And that's true - God must elect people to go to Heaven, fully knowing some people He creates are going to Hell. Unfortunate when you think about it.
http://pearls.org/index.php/content/view/931/56/
http://en.fgulen.com/content/view/665/4/
There is an infinitely long line of spiritual evolution between the ranks of the greatest Prophets and saints down to those of people like Pharaoh and Nimrod. Therefore, it cannot be claimed that the creation of Satan is evil. Although Satan is evil and serves various important purposes, God's creation involves the whole universe and should be understood in relation to the results, not only with respect to the acts themselves.
Whatever God does or creates is good and beautiful in itself or in its effects. For example, rain and fire are very useful but can cause great harm when abused. Therefore, one cannot claim that the creation of water and fire is not totally good.
It is the same with the creation of Satan. His main purpose is to cause us to develop our potential, strengthen our willpower by resisting his temptations, and then rise to higher spiritual ranks.
http://en.fgulen.com/content/view/665/4/
There is an infinitely long line of spiritual evolution between the ranks of the greatest Prophets and saints down to those of people like Pharaoh and Nimrod. Therefore, it cannot be claimed that the creation of Satan is evil. Although Satan is evil and serves various important purposes, God's creation involves the whole universe and should be understood in relation to the results, not only with respect to the acts themselves.
Whatever God does or creates is good and beautiful in itself or in its effects. For example, rain and fire are very useful but can cause great harm when abused. Therefore, one cannot claim that the creation of water and fire is not totally good.
It is the same with the creation of Satan. His main purpose is to cause us to develop our potential, strengthen our willpower by resisting his temptations, and then rise to higher spiritual ranks.
the_mariska,
I specifically said that I would not attempt to convince anyone. Also, I never said that I should. So please, don't point fingers at me.
Also, I do not find theism the absence of rationality or proof, I find it the beliefs meant to guide us through our lives and to explain our existence.
To me, theism is the presence of proof.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. - Genesis 1:1-2
That's all the proof I'll ever need.
I specifically said that I would not attempt to convince anyone. Also, I never said that I should. So please, don't point fingers at me.
Also, I do not find theism the absence of rationality or proof, I find it the beliefs meant to guide us through our lives and to explain our existence.
To me, theism is the presence of proof.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. - Genesis 1:1-2
That's all the proof I'll ever need.
It is not fun to create an angel being that has no chance to make own decision:)God doesn't know everything...nobody can:)
Of course God knows everything, God is everything. Everything that has ever been thought up was given to its specific thinker by God.
One who creates everything knows everything.
Scripture:
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. - Genesis 2:1
Then Solomon stood before the altar of the LORD in front of the whole assembly of Israel, spread out his hands toward heaven and said: O LORD, God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven above or on earth below - you who keep your covenant of love with your servants who continue wholeheartedly in your way. - 1 Kings 8:22-23
The great Solomon, King of Israel, Son of David, who was one of the greatest thinkers of all time. He was given his fame, knowledge, and power to lead by God. He recognized it in the scripture above and later used his great knowledge to write both the books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes.
One who creates everything knows everything.
Scripture:
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array. - Genesis 2:1
Then Solomon stood before the altar of the LORD in front of the whole assembly of Israel, spread out his hands toward heaven and said: O LORD, God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven above or on earth below - you who keep your covenant of love with your servants who continue wholeheartedly in your way. - 1 Kings 8:22-23
The great Solomon, King of Israel, Son of David, who was one of the greatest thinkers of all time. He was given his fame, knowledge, and power to lead by God. He recognized it in the scripture above and later used his great knowledge to write both the books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes.
Remember that God didn't create Satan. The first words of the bible show god making earth and heaven. After that he makes man in "our own image." assumably that is speaking of his and the angels' image ("our"). But never does it say that he created the angels. They were just kind of there. Now satan is an angel. He was originaly Lucifer the angel but then fell from grace. So the answer is that God did not create Satan.
Not quite,
I've looked in the Book of Genesis and it states that before Creation there was nothing but the Spirit of God hovering over the empty void.
He would have had to create the angels, thus God did create Satan.
Also, as an ardent Jew, I must remain firm that I don't believe in a "blind faith." A blind faith is sitting in a laboratory hour upon hour watching a rat and waiting for it to evolve into some strange creature. Evolution is in itself outlandish. For stars to explode and bring about simple little bacteria-like creatures that evolve over millions of years is absurd.
A very good organization, Answers in Genesis, and its founder, Ken Ham, made a series of DVD's on the matter of evolution. This is a fantastic reference using the Bible and even interviews with evolutionists.
When an ardent evolutionist with a Ph. D. in chromatic biology was presented with the question "where did the DNA strands come from?", they had nothing to say. The DNA strands would have had to been placed by an intelligent being (such as the all-knowing Lord God Almighty)
I won't rave on this because speaking of evolution makes me feel unclean.
May Adonai Bless you!
I've looked in the Book of Genesis and it states that before Creation there was nothing but the Spirit of God hovering over the empty void.
He would have had to create the angels, thus God did create Satan.
Also, as an ardent Jew, I must remain firm that I don't believe in a "blind faith." A blind faith is sitting in a laboratory hour upon hour watching a rat and waiting for it to evolve into some strange creature. Evolution is in itself outlandish. For stars to explode and bring about simple little bacteria-like creatures that evolve over millions of years is absurd.
A very good organization, Answers in Genesis, and its founder, Ken Ham, made a series of DVD's on the matter of evolution. This is a fantastic reference using the Bible and even interviews with evolutionists.
When an ardent evolutionist with a Ph. D. in chromatic biology was presented with the question "where did the DNA strands come from?", they had nothing to say. The DNA strands would have had to been placed by an intelligent being (such as the all-knowing Lord God Almighty)
I won't rave on this because speaking of evolution makes me feel unclean.
May Adonai Bless you!
| Tyler wrote: |
| A blind faith is sitting in a laboratory hour upon hour watching a rat and waiting for it to evolve into some strange creature. Evolution is in itself outlandish. For stars to explode and bring about simple little bacteria-like creatures that evolve over millions of years is absurd. |
^_^; Honestly dude, you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. None of what you mentioned has anything to do with the theory of evolution, excepting perhaps the words "simple little bacteria-like creatures that evolve over millions of years". And even that's a stretch because the way you've worded it is not really in agreement with the theory evolution, exactly (although if you strain, you can kind of take advantage of its vagueness to say it is).
If that nonsense is what you think the theory of evolution is about, then you have no idea about what you're railing against at all.
| Tyler wrote: |
| A very good organization, Answers in Genesis, and its founder, Ken Ham, made a series of DVD's on the matter of evolution. This is a fantastic reference using the Bible and even interviews with evolutionists. |
Which would be a really neat trick, because there is no such thing as an evolutionist. ^_^; There hasn't been since, oh, the mid-late 19th century. In order to be interviewing evolutionists, he would have to be talking to dead people. Does this Ken Ham perhaps know John Edward?
Real biologists and anthropologists who do work related to the theory of evolution do not call themselves "evolutionists", or the work they do "evolutionism". That term is only used by opponents. Therefore, if the "evolutionists" on that show referred to themselves as "evolutionsists", chances are very good that they are plants, and the interviews fraudulent or misrepresented. And it happens often that people who have an agenda to discredit evolutionary biology and anthropology misrepresent themselves as dispassionate researchers who are "at a loss" to explain the "shortcomings" of the theory of evolution.
Frankly discrediting evolutionary theory is rather disingenious, even from a religious fanatic's perspective. If there were no evolution, then Noah's ark would have had to hold mating couples for every single species on Earth. That's around 20 million species, give or take (could be as low as 3 million and as high as 115 million, and ignoring which puts the middle at around 50 million, then allowing for more than half of those to be ocean dwellers). So 40 million creatures. Including food for them for a month and a half. Pretty tall order for a wooden boat. On the other hand, if you allow for evolution, even in a limited sense, you can shrink that number by a couple orders of magnitude, and even get to the point where the ark becomes only wildly improbable, rather than insanely impossible. Which is, i suppose, some kind of improvement.
| Tyler wrote: |
| When an ardent evolutionist with a Ph. D. in chromatic biology was presented with the question "where did the DNA strands come from?", they had nothing to say. The DNA strands would have had to been placed by an intelligent being (such as the all-knowing Lord God Almighty) |
Aaaaah! i see. Well that's an interesting way to determine what is true and what isn't. Corner an expert in the field with a poorly-phrased and loaded question, and if he can't answer then his entire field of study is discredited as absolutely untrue. (Bonus points: pick an expert in a field that has nothing to do with the question at hand. i don't even know what a "chromatic biologist" is, although i've heard of the term "chromatic biology" used to describe studies referring to how the colour patterns in certain camouflage-capable animals are created and controlled via neurochemical transmissions or cell signalling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatophore). There's also chromatography (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatography), but that has even less to do with evolution (as in, nothing at all ^_^).)
So tell me, why does God allow evil to exist? Why does an all-knowing god need a devil to test his creations - doesn't he know already how the test is going to turn out, and isn't the test going to turn out exactly the way he intended it to when he created the creation and the devil?
Remember, you must answer without evasion! Or your whole theology is wrong!
| Tyler wrote: |
| I won't rave on this because speaking of evolution makes me feel unclean. |
Wow. ^_^;
Firstly,
By evolutionist I meant someone who believes in evolution as the "way of the life" so to speak.
Secondly,
It saddens me deeply that atheists have to attack the beliefs of theists, merely because they try to make meaning out of the life they scrape off of rock and believe as to be meaningless.
The Lord God Almighty wished it that all should know the way he created everything from nothing.
If you would, at least, try a religion such as Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, etc. and then after ytou actually know what it's about you can attempt to argue with those whose beliefs are carved into stone.
By evolutionist I meant someone who believes in evolution as the "way of the life" so to speak.
Secondly,
It saddens me deeply that atheists have to attack the beliefs of theists, merely because they try to make meaning out of the life they scrape off of rock and believe as to be meaningless.
The Lord God Almighty wished it that all should know the way he created everything from nothing.
If you would, at least, try a religion such as Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, etc. and then after ytou actually know what it's about you can attempt to argue with those whose beliefs are carved into stone.
| Tyler wrote: |
| Firstly,
By evolutionist I meant someone who believes in evolution as the "way of the life" so to speak. |
If you're talking about some religion of "evolutionism", you should probably say so, because it sounds like you're talking about scientists and the theory of evolution. Real scientists working with the real scientific theory of evolution do not "believe" in it as a "way of the life", so to speak. By and large they believe that it's most likely true, and either base their research on that assumption or do research to challenge that assumption. But it's not a way of life for them, it's a scientific theory.
i don't worship Darwin. i don't quote from The origin of species to justifiy my beliefs or my actions - never even read it (of course, most Christians haven't really read the bible, so that's hardly a relevant point). Yet i believe that evolution due to natural selection is probably the primary cause for the existence of the varied species on this planet, and i base that belief on the fact that the evidence that we have supports that theory above all others (by far, actually - for every datum against the theory there are thousands upon thousands for). No other theory matches the facts that i have observed or that i have researched nearly as well. If you have an alternate theory to present, i would be happy to hear it, but considering the HUGE amount of evidence amassed in favour of evolution, you're going to have a hell of a time finding enough evidence to prove it wrong. Still, unlikely though it may be, it is possible that the theory of evolution is wrong, and i'd be happy to hear if it were. Am i an evolutionist?
| Tyler wrote: |
| Secondly,
It saddens me deeply that atheists have to attack the beliefs of theists, merely because they try to make meaning out of the life they scrape off of rock and believe as to be meaningless. |
But it's a-ok for you and Ken Ham to attack these evolutionist's beliefs? Despite the fact that you merely try to make meaning out of life using information you cobble together from an ecclectic collection of vague and contradictory ancient writings in dead languages?
| Tyler wrote: |
| If you would, at least, try a religion such as Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, etc. and then after ytou actually know what it's about you can attempt to argue with those whose beliefs are carved into stone. |
Stone crumbles quite easily you know. ^_^ That's why we use rebar.
And you obviously haven't had any run-ins with me before, if you can make a suggestion like that with a straight face. ^_^; Of course, i can turn that right back around to you, because you can hardly have seriously considered the opposing argument when:
1.) you don't even have the most general concept of the theory of evolution down correctly
2.) even mentioning it made you feel unclean.
If i'm clueless about religion because i've never been a follower of any religion, aren't you just as clueless about evolution given that you've obviously never done any semi-serious study of it?
i do note with amusement that you never answered the questions i posed you - which are pretty much the questions of this thread. By your own standards, that means that it is now acceptible to dismiss your entire belief system. The cruelest standard by which to judge someone is their own.
| Indi wrote: | ||||||
If you're talking about some religion of "evolutionism", you should probably say so, because it sounds like you're talking about scientists and the theory of evolution. Real scientists working with the real scientific theory of evolution do not "believe" in it as a "way of the life", so to speak. By and large they believe that it's most likely true, and either base their research on that assumption or do research to challenge that assumption. But it's not a way of life for them, it's a scientific theory. i don't worship Darwin. i don't quote from The origin of species to justifiy my beliefs or my actions - never even read it (of course, most Christians haven't really read the bible, so that's hardly a relevant point). Yet i believe that evolution due to natural selection is probably the primary cause for the existence of the varied species on this planet, and i base that belief on the fact that the evidence that we have supports that theory above all others (by far, actually - for every datum against the theory there are thousands upon thousands for). No other theory matches the facts that i have observed or that i have researched nearly as well. If you have an alternate theory to present, i would be happy to hear it, but considering the HUGE amount of evidence amassed in favour of evolution, you're going to have a hell of a time finding enough evidence to prove it wrong. Still, unlikely though it may be, it is possible that the theory of evolution is wrong, and i'd be happy to hear if it were. Am i an evolutionist?
But it's a-ok for you and Ken Ham to attack these evolutionist's beliefs? Despite the fact that you merely try to make meaning out of life using information you cobble together from an ecclectic collection of vague and contradictory ancient writings in dead languages?
Stone crumbles quite easily you know. ^_^ That's why we use rebar. And you obviously haven't had any run-ins with me before, if you can make a suggestion like that with a straight face. ^_^; Of course, i can turn that right back around to you, because you can hardly have seriously considered the opposing argument when: 1.) you don't even have the most general concept of the theory of evolution down correctly 2.) even mentioning it made you feel unclean. If i'm clueless about religion because i've never been a follower of any religion, aren't you just as clueless about evolution given that you've obviously never done any semi-serious study of it? i do note with amusement that you never answered the questions i posed you - which are pretty much the questions of this thread. By your own standards, that means that it is now acceptible to dismiss your entire belief system. The cruelest standard by which to judge someone is their own. |
Um... the last time I checked, the languages the Bible are written in (Greek and Hebrew) are still active languages.
As a Jew, I speak Hebrew, so do the rest of the Jewish people.
Greek has been spoken for over 3500 years.
I don't know much about evolution, because I don't believe in it. If there's ever something that I can't decipher, I turn to God.
God is omniscient and is the Creator of All.
I'm kinda tired of arguing with you to tell the truth. If you're not religious, fine. But don't come into a topic for those who are theists just to start a fuss over controversial theorems and hypotheses.
We who are religious wish to share our thoughts about our religions. If you want to tell your ideas and philosophies, why not start an atheists' topic?
Better than doing it in a religious topic.
Oh wait, missed those questions. God did not create evil. Adam and Eve sinned and passed it to the rest of mankind. He gave them personality, so they were a bit mutinous, so to speak. Satan was created as the Tempter to see if the wills of humans could overpower that of his extremely provoking ways.
God definitely knew everything that was to pass. However, he threw the Devil from heaven after he disobeyed the will of God. He threw him to the place we know as Hell as an exile and one who would pick out those who were not worthy of heaven. God could have done this himself, but he put these events into action to lead to something else. Now I'm leaving Jewish belief and going to Christian belief. He had these events put into action to lead to the Antichrist's coming and the eventual apocalypse and second coming of the Messiah. Of course, this isn't Jewish belief, we do not believe the Messiah has come yet.
However, on this, I highly recommend examining the Book of Revelations.
Thanks,
Tyler
| Tyler wrote: |
| Um... the last time I checked, the languages the Bible are written in (Greek and Hebrew) are still active languages. |
Um... check again.
The bible as it has come down to us exists primarily in 3 languages. Koine Greek, Biblical Hebrew and Ancient Aramaic.
None of them are currently in use.
| Tyler wrote: |
| I'm kinda tired of arguing with you to tell the truth. If you're not religious, fine. But don't come into a topic for those who are theists just to start a fuss over controversial theorems and hypotheses. |
i am here because i think this is an interesting and important question, and relevant for anyone interested in studying theology. Not just theists. Furthermore, i think i can and have contributed something of worth to the discussion. i have answered questions and raised new challenges that have furthered the discussion. In fact, it might do you benefit to read some of what i have already written, because you are making points that have already been shown to be incorrect (which i'll show in a bit).
i have not started any fuss over any topic other than the one the thread is actually about - but then, that's rather the point of the thread isn't it? By contrast, you brought up "evolutionism" without any real reason to, and began disparaging it. Do you really think that helped the discussion?
| Tyler wrote: |
| We who are religious wish to share our thoughts about our religions. If you want to tell your ideas and philosophies, why not start an atheists' topic? |
So basically, get the hell out of anywhere religion is discussed? i'm sure god would be proud of your brotherly display of neighbourliness towards your fellow man.
| Tyler wrote: |
| Oh wait, missed those questions. God did not create evil. Adam and Eve sinned and passed it to the rest of mankind. He gave them personality, so they were a bit mutinous, so to speak. Satan was created as the Tempter to see if the wills of humans could overpower that of his extremely provoking ways. |
You have not bothered to read the thread. Your answer has already been shown to be wrong. Repeatedly.
| Tyler wrote: |
| God definitely knew everything that was to pass. However, he threw the Devil from heaven after he disobeyed the will of God. He threw him to the place we know as Hell as an exile and one who would pick out those who were not worthy of heaven. God could have done this himself, but he put these events into action to lead to something else. Now I'm leaving Jewish belief and going to Christian belief. He had these events put into action to lead to the Antichrist's coming and the eventual apocalypse and second coming of the Messiah. Of course, this isn't Jewish belief, we do not believe the Messiah has come yet. |
You see? You're contradicting yourself. On the one hand you say God did not create evil. On the other you say that he knew it would be created, did nothing to stop it, and in fact set events in motion that made it happen. In other words, he created evil.
Try re-reading the thread. In particular, the last third of this post pretty much covers everything you just said.
| Tyler wrote: |
| However, on this, I highly recommend examining the Book of Revelations. |
Been there, done that. Still doesn't make logical sense.
Either God created everything or he did not (omnipotence). Either God knew exactly what he was doing when he created everything or he did not (omniscience). If the answer to both of those is "he did", then God is responsible for all evil and suffering in the universe. There is no escape from this conclusion. It is