Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: floo on June 23, 2016, 11:34:33 AM
-
deleted
-
Well, probably the "baddie" overcame and usurped the role of the "goody" and is pretending to be god whilst the real one is left lurking around the shadows.
We will find out all in the next installment/episode unless the series has been canned :)
-
Job is interesting as here, Satan is God's little helper, and works as a kind of hitman. Probably a very old text, and showing some interesting views of Satan as someone testing the faithful, on God's behalf. These ideas often erased by later Christians.
-
I just don't understand why Satan is supposed to be a baddie, but the Biblical god all that is good? The deeds attributed to god are highly unpleasant to say the least, and indicate the entity is very deranged. Although poor Satan is always slagged off, no actual misdeeds have been attributed to him.
Do you expect a sensible answer and a genuine discussion when you suggest God is deranged in your OP? Or is it just another opportunity for you to say that sort of thing?
-
Do you expect a sensible answer and a genuine discussion when you suggest God is deranged in your OP? Or is it just another opportunity for you to say that sort of thing?
Well do the deeds attributed to the god of the Bible indicate an entity who is sane?
-
One idea is that Satan, an angel, was to be Adam and Eve's tutor in the Garden, in the same way that the Angel of Yahweh helped Israel. Instead he tricked them into disobeying God. We are not told at what point he 'fell', just that sin was found in him. (See Ezekiel 28)
-
You only need look at the Jewish Bible & the later, shall we say, RE-writes in the Christian Bible to see the vastly differing POV of Satan.
-
Well do the deeds attributed to the god of the Bible indicate an entity who is sane?
You haven't answered my question.
-
I just don't understand why Satan is supposed to be a baddie, but the Biblical god all that is good? The deeds attributed to god are highly unpleasant to say the least, and indicate the entity is very deranged. Although poor Satan is always slagged off, no actual misdeeds have been attributed to him.
Floo, do you ever read posts that others make in answer to questions like this? This must be the 2nd, perhaps even 3rd thread in which you've asked the same basic question - this year alone.
If yu look at the etymology of the word, you will see that the term 'Satan' can't be anything other than the bad-guy.
proper name of the supreme evil spirit in Christianity, Old English Satan, from Late Latin Satan (in Vulgate in Old Testament only), from Greek Satanas, from Hebrew satan "adversary, one who plots against another," from satan "to show enmity to, oppose, plot against," from root s-t-n "one who opposes, obstructs, or acts as an adversary." ...
In biblical sources the Hebrew term the satan describes an adversarial role. It is not the name of a particular character. Although Hebrew storytellers as early as the sixth century B.C.E. occasionally introduced a supernatural character whom they called the satan, what they meant was any one of the angels sent by God for the specific purpose of blocking or obstructing human activity. [Elaine Pagels, "The Origin of Satan," 1995]
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?l=s&p=7&allowed_in_frame=0
Furthermore, and from the same source,
In Septuagint (Greek) usually translated as diabolos "slanderer," literally "one who throws (something) across" the path of another (see devil (n.)), though epiboulos "plotter" is used once.
In other words, Satan can, by very definition, be nothing other than an 'opponent' or 'obstructionist'. That then can extend - again by definition - to 'destroyer'.
-
Well, probably the "baddie" overcame and usurped the role of the "goody" and is pretending to be god whilst the real one is left lurking around the shadows.
Interestingly, Udayana, that sums up the Jewish and Christian understanding pretty well. It is in part why Satan is referred to as the 'prince of this world' and 'the ruler of the kingdom of the air' in John 12:31 and Ephesians 2:2 respectively.
-
It's also a Gnostic idea.
-
One idea is that Satan, an angel, was to be Adam and Eve's tutor in the Garden, in the same way that the Angel of Yahweh helped Israel. Instead he tricked them into disobeying God. We are not told at what point he 'fell', just that sin was found in him. (See Ezekiel 28)
If that was true, I back Satan all the way if it disobeyed the evil god.
-
I just don't understand why Satan is supposed to be a baddie,
Because history is written by the winners. ;)
-
Because history is written by the winners. ;)
Meaning?
-
If that was true, I back Satan all the way if it disobeyed the evil god.
The view of Satan changes in the Bible, as does the view of God. As for the Garden of Eden story, there is no mention of Satan in it - only a 'subtle' talking snake.
Though the early view of God in the Bible may be seen as evil, I think you'd be hard pressed to designate all the recorded acts of Jesus (through whom God is supposed to have worked) as evil. Unless you think that healing the sick and preaching peace and love are evil things to be promoting.
As has been pointed out, it was the Christians who first came up with the idea of Satan as an evil, independent entity. There are no particular references to him being such in the Old Testament, except perhaps in the book of Zechariah (even the reference to him in Job, which wiggi has mentioned, promotes him as god's henchman - albeit the one who gets his hands dirty).
-
It's also a Gnostic idea.
Well, the Ophite Gnostics gave their own slant on the Christian interpretation of the snake in the Garden of Eden, claiming that it was the spirit of truth and goodness which spoke through it, and that old Yahweh was the liar.
-
Why do you think they 'used' Jesus' character to negate that awful creature of the OT.??
Few so-called pagan gods were so ruthless & nasty !?!?
We must also remember the Jewish has nothing like a Satan figure in it.
-
Well, where there are two Jews, there are three opinions.
Those Jewish people who follow Kabbalistic teachings have similar beliefs to the Ophite Gnostics with regard to the serpent in Eden.
The Chassidics believe that Satan (which means prosecutor in Hebrew), does everything for the sake of Heaven.
-
Excellent points !!!
From what I've read in & about Jewish literature they thought Satan could only do anything if he was 'allowed' by God !!!
Makes sense to me. ;)
-
It's also a Gnostic idea.
Not sure that that is true; I understand it pre-dates Gnosticism, by about as long as much of the Hebrew Bible pre-dates Gnosticism.
-
If that was true, I back Satan all the way if it disobeyed the evil god.
Floo, all your references to the 'evil god' post-date the fall, at which point evil entered the world. It would appear, however, that Satan's (Lucifer's) fall from grace predates the fall - is, in effect the catalyst for the fall. Where is your evidence that God was in any way evil prior to the fall?
(edited for spelling!!)
-
Because history is written by the winners. ;)
If that's the case, how would a nation/people group that was constantly harrassed and persecuted, and their successors - the early church - who also underwent harrassment and persecution, be writing history?
-
Excellent points !!!
From what I've read in & about Jewish literature they thought Satan could only do anything if he was 'allowed' by God !!!
Makes sense to me. ;)
And a being that allows bad things to happen to people isn't necessarily evil. I wonder how many of us here have allowed our children to take the consequences of their own actions, Floo, rather than protecting them.
-
SUCCESSORS - EXCUSE ME ?!!?!?!?!?
I dare you to go to your local synagogue & tell them ALL this !?!?!? :o ::)
Anyway the ancient Israelites - Hebrews kept their writings to themselves so had complete control over who saw what, no?
Nick
-
SUCCESSORS - EXCUSE ME ?!!?!?!?!?
I dare you to go to your local synagogue & tell them ALL this !?!?!? :o ::)
Just because one group, be that religious or political, believe that they can't be superceded, it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen in practice.
Anyway the ancient Israelites - Hebrews kept their writings to themselves so had complete control over who saw what, no?
Nick
If the Old Testament is to be believed, chunks of the Hebrew Scriptures ended up all over the Middle East - some of the Assyrian and other invading armies even quoted from them.
-
So stealing stuff is quite often happening eh?
-
Discussing Satan as though this thing Satan, whatever it's supposed to be, as though it's a part of reality is a good demonstration of how delusional the whole lot of religious believers are.
Yet another piece of head shakingly daft religious nonsense, "Satan"?
ippy
-
Floo, all your references to the 'evil god' post-date the fall, at which point evil entered the world. It would appear, however, that Satan's (Lucifer's) fall from grace predates the fall - is, in effect the catalyst for the fall. Where is your evidence that God was in any way evil prior to the fall?
(edited for spelling!!)
As I have said many times, if god exists and was responsible for everything, including human nature, then it was either screwed up very badly, or more likely enjoys human suffering!
-
Oy Mrs floo, you started this thread and both Hope and Maeght have replied and asked you a question, posts #7 & #8. No point in starting a thread if you don't engage with the responses.
(You have also been asked a question a couple of times over on the Pistorius thread, which you didn't start.)
-
If that's the case, how would a nation/people group that was constantly harrassed and persecuted, and their successors - the early church - who also underwent harrassment and persecution, be writing history?
Christians won in the 4th century. Thus it is their history that survives.
-
For those who have actually have actually read the Bible, surely they should be able to see the god depicted there is bonkers, unless they are wearing rose coloured specs!
-
P l e a s e read the posts that you have encouraged by starting this thread, floo.
-
Brownie, I have said my say!
-
So you don't really want comments or even read them. I give up.
-
Brownie, I have said my say!
Which answers my question of course.
-
Brownie, I have said my say!
No you haven't, Floo. I can guarentee that we wil at least one more thread from you on exactly this same topic this year, using very similar arguments to this one.
-
For those who have actually have actually read the Bible, surely they should be able to see the god depicted there is bonkers, unless they are wearing rose coloured specs!
Floo, I used to think the same as you do now when I was a teenager - but then realised that what I was looking through was a very heavily tinted pair of metaphorical specs.
-
H
So how do you get round all the horrible things he did then??
Nick
-
Christians won in the 4th century. Thus it is their history that survives.
Yet what we have in the Bible - which is of course what survives - pre-dates that 'victory' by some 3 centuries. At the same time, one can question whether having a Roman Empire absorb a religion like Christianity to sit alongside its existing thinking was even a victory. Over the years, it became an ever-increasingly status belief for many Romans.
-
Floo, I used to think the same as you do now when I was a teenager - but then realised that what I was looking through was a very heavily tinted pair of metaphorical specs.
Through a glass darkly.
I've had a thought about the title of this thread, why do we think Satan is a guy?
-
H
So how do you get round all the horrible things he did then??
Nick
Nick, punishment is a perfectly normal and acceptable action - even today when so many seem to think that it cramps people's development.
It is also worth remembering that almost all the examples Floo has referenced in her regular forays into this subject are taken from a sizeable passage that even Jewish scholars have acknowledged over the years as having likely been written in the 5th century BC - so isn't historical in any sense at all, but has a theological tone to it.
-
OK
So how do you know what YOU believe is actually correct then?
-
We had a worldwide flood yesterday. It came right up to our front door
-
We had a worldwide flood yesterday. It came right up to our front door
Not my door so not world-wide.
-
Through a glass darkly.
I've had a thought about the title of this thread, why do we think Satan is a guy?
I think about Satan Brownie, as yet another load of nonsense that religious lot have unfounded beliefs about.
Satan is about as real as Harry Potter, why can't you people see it ? There's no supporting evidence evidence for any of the magic, mystical and superstition based parts of any religion.
ippy
-
Yet what we have in the Bible - which is of course what survives - pre-dates that 'victory' by some 3 centuries.
Two centuries.
Also, we really don't have very much early Christian writing.
At the same time, one can question whether having a Roman Empire absorb a religion like Christianity to sit alongside its existing thinking was even a victory. Over the years, it became an ever-increasingly status belief for many Romans.
That's hardly a correct characterisation of what happened. It didn't really take very long for the Christians to oust all the other beliefs.
-
I am not certain that I believe in Satan as a person ippy, the story is that he was a wondrous, glittering angel who fell from grace. I see the image of Satan as the personification of evil.
Spud, we had near flood conditions here on the edge of SE London. I live in a house on top of a hill which is very useful at times! Seemed OK today though (or should I say "yesterday" as it is now early hours of Monday).
-
Floo, I used to think the same as you do now when I was a teenager - but then realised that what I was looking through was a very heavily tinted pair of metaphorical specs.
When I was a teenager I thought like you do now, much to my shame, but now realise I was viewing it through rose coloured specs! :D
-
We had a worldwide flood yesterday. It came right up to our front door
Pants on fire! :D
-
I am not certain that I believe in Satan as a person ippy, the story is that he was a wondrous, glittering angel who fell from grace. I see the image of Satan as the personification of evil.
Spud, we had near flood conditions here on the edge of SE London. I live in a house on top of a hill which is very useful at times! Seemed OK today though (or should I say "yesterday" as it is now early hours of Monday).
Poor you, how about Unicorns as well, you might just as well believe in Unicorns as well as Satan, it would make equally as much sense.
Why don't you just enjoy the reinforcement meetings and use your common sense and let them get on with the mythical, magic bits and just enjoy their company.
There's no such things as Devils or Satan; not one person has ever found any evidence that would or could support such a silly idea, forget about it and get on with your life there's enough problems that get thrown up at all of us with just the ordinary things in life without manufacturing any more problems like devils and other such nonsense.
ippy
-
Poor you, how about Unicorns as well, you might just as well believe in Unicorns as well as Satan, it would make equally as much sense.
Why don't you just enjoy the reinforcement meetings and use your common sense and let them get on with the mythical, magic bits and just enjoy their company.
There's no such things as Devils or Satan; not one person has ever found any evidence that would or could support such a silly idea, forget about it and get on with your life there's enough problems that get thrown up at all of us with just the ordinary things in life without manufacturing any more problems like devils and other such nonsense.
ippy
There is as much evidence for unicorns, fairies and other mythical creatures as there is for the existence of Satan and god.
-
That is what ippy said, if not in those words.
So why worry?
-
Its probably based on a gut feeling though, so must be right.
-
Where is the verifiable evidence to support the existence of Satan and god? No one has ever provided any.
-
Where is the verifiable evidence to support the existence of Satan and god? No one has ever provided any.
Evidence? Who needs evidence when its a gut feeling.
-
Evidence? Who needs evidence when its a gut feeling.
So you have a gut feeling Satan/god are real entities, I take it you also have a gut feeling that unicorns, fairies, elves etc are mythical? :D
-
So you have a gut feeling Satan/god are real entities, I take it you also have a gut feeling that unicorns, fairies, elves etc are mythical? :D
Of course not, but people do, and was just using your logic from the Oscar Pistorious thread. Thought that was obvious to be honest.
-
Of course not, but people do, and was just using your logic from the Oscar Pistorious thread. Thought that was obvious to be honest.
This thread isn't about that murderer, but about the even more dastardly god who tries to put the blame on dear Satan!
BTW you remind me of a now banned poster whose pedantry knew no bounds! :D
-
It was obvious.
Not that long ago you believed in other-wordly things, floo, and they are well documented. I don't remember anyone dissing you about it.
-
This thread isn't about that murderer, but about the even more dastardly god who tries to put the blame on dear Satan!
I wasn't talking about that murder but about the logic you used.
BTW you remind me of a now banned poster whose pedantry knew no bounds! :D
Can you address the points though? And, as I have said to another poster many times, adding smiles to posts doesn't make them any more special.
-
It was obvious.
Not that long ago you believed in other-wordly things, floo, and they are well documented. I don't remember anyone dissing you about it.
I haven't been a practising Christian since I was a late teenager. I respect those with a very moderate approach to the faith, and have created artwork reflecting their faith, I have been commissioned to do several pieces of that nature. I did used to describe myself as a very liberal out of sight Christian, which was how I thought I saw myself. However, I realised it wasn't a correct representation of myself, I now describe myself as an agnostic. It is just possible a god of some description could exist in another dimension, but I don't believe it impinges on our universe.
-
I respect that floo.
(The rest removed because I wasn't very sensitive)
-
Some people of faith do tend to see their religions as literally true, ALL of it !!!
I lean very heavily towards Hinduism & quite early on saw its MYTHOLOGY !!! as something to help explain the human condition from a Hindu POV. And very useful it's been too.
Nick
-
I respect that floo.
I wasn't thinking of your faith or lack of it though; you mentioned fairies and unicorns etc but you did for a while believe in ghostly apparitions, made quite a career out of it. It probably embarrasses you now but facts are facts, you even got the media involved. It wasn't that long ago. No-one dissed you about it.
That is totally UNTRUE!!!!!!! We NEVER believed it to be 'supernatural', as I have stated times without number. My husband and I were always looking for a natural explanation, including a hoax! We never made a career out of it. We didn't get the media involved they got to hear about it, and knocked on our door. Occasionally we would let them film the phenomena. More often than not we refused to give them the time of day. The now defunct, 'News of the World', wanted an interview which we refused to give them, but they printed a highly inaccurate account anyway. An American film company wanted to pay us mega bucks to do the business, but when we heard how they were going to handle it, we turned them down flat.
It was suggested we should make money out of our 'miracle field' as it was becoming like a mini Lourdes. Whilst we permitted people to stand at the field gate for free, we would never consider making it into a business, as that would be so wrong especially, as we are sceptics.
Please get your facts right, Brownie!
-
Some people of faith do tend to see their religions as literally true, ALL of it !!!
I lean very heavily towards Hinduism & quite early on saw its MYTHOLOGY !!! as something to help explain the human condition from a Hindu POV. And very useful it's been too.
Nick
It is hard to understand how people can accept the literal truth of their religions, like Christianity, when there is no supporting evidence.
-
Alright floo, I'll remove the post and trust you will remove yours, then I'll make this one vanish.
I intended to come back quickly and remove my post because, on reflection, it seemed a bit like being nasty to a child which I hadn't intended and I regretted it but my husband came home and wanted to use the computer.
So I won't say it again. However, quite honestly, sometimes you are your own worst enemy.
-
For those who have actually have actually read the Bible, surely they should be able to see the god depicted there is bonkers, unless they are wearing rose coloured specs!
Why do you continue to view the Bible as one book, just as the fundamentalists do? It's a library, with as many depictions of God as there are prophets. The worst depictions are in the Pentateuch, where probably the worst story of all occurs - that of Noah. Any idea how many times that story is referred to in the later prophets? Better still, any idea how many times the story of Adam and Eve is referred to in the later prophets?*
It's all just literature, some with a bit of historical fact (not much), lots of mythical stuff, some poetry, some moral advice (lots of it irrelevant twaddle about not worshiping 'false' gods). But all of it changing, evolving ideas, and some of the early stories were probably completely unknown to quite a number of the later authors.
Satan, God - just ideas in people's heads, and all believers with different ideas about what these concepts might signify.
*My implication is that many of the writers in the Old Testament either didn't actually know these stories, or perhaps didn't consider them too relevant to the realities of their contemporary lives, since the references are so few.
-
Nice post, Dicky. Some rabbis used to celebrate the contradictions in the Jewish Bible (OT), and said that the different positions had a conversation with each other. I suppose this is a bit too post-modern for some!
-
It sounds very Jewish wigginhall.
-
Why do you continue to view the Bible as one book, just as the fundamentalists do? It's a library, with as many depictions of God as there are prophets. The worst depictions are in the Pentateuch, where probably the worst story of all occurs - that of Noah. Any idea how many times that story is referred to in the later prophets? Better still, any idea how many times the story of Adam and Eve is referred to in the later prophets?*
It's all just literature, some with a bit of historical fact (not much), lots of mythical stuff, some poetry, some moral advice (lots of it irrelevant twaddle about not worshiping 'false' gods). But all of it changing, evolving ideas, and some of the early stories were probably completely unknown to quite a number of the later authors.
Satan, God - just ideas in people's heads, and all believers with different ideas about what these concepts might signify.
*My implication is that many of the writers in the Old Testament either didn't actually know these stories, or perhaps didn't consider them too relevant to the realities of their contemporary lives, since the references are so few.
I am well aware that the Bible is a collection of documents written over a long period of time by different authors, before being put together in the form we have now at a much later date. I heard Revelation nearly didn't get clearance to be included.
Of course many Christians don't believe the book to be literally true. My comments are directed at those who believe god was guiding the hands of the authors and writing down what it was directing them to write, and is therefore in their opinion a true portrayal of god's thoughts and deeds. I don't think it is unreasonable for me to challenge their love for a god who has done the most dastardly deeds, according to the Bible.
-
My comments are directed at those who believe god was guiding the hands of the authors and writing down what it was directing them to write, and is therefore in their opinion a true portrayal of god's thoughts and deeds. I don't think it is unreasonable for me to challenge their love for a god who has done the most dastardly deeds, according to the Bible.
On this forum, I think only Spud quite fits this category, though maybe Hope and the 2 Alans come close. You don't seem to have dented the views of any of these. Maybe it's time to change tactics?
I can see some sense in the more liberal view that people had some misguided ideas about what God is like, and gradually, as the centuries progressed, they grew away from the old ideas. That's a bit simplistic though, since there are some pretty contradictory views about God even in the early part of the Bible (insofar as we can judge in what time-periods the earlier accounts were written anyway).
The biggest question of all, for those of agnostic leanings, is "Granted that we have a whole array of Nobodaddies, is there actually a real Somebodaddy behind them all?"
I don't believe there is.
-
On this forum, I think only Spud quite fits this category, though maybe Hope and the 2 Alans come close. You don't seem to have dented the views of any of these. Maybe it's time to change tactics?
I can see some sense in the more liberal view that people had some misguided ideas about what God is like, and gradually, as the centuries progressed, they grew away from the old ideas. That's a bit simplistic though, since there are some pretty contradictory views about God even in the early part of the Bible (insofar as we can judge in what time-periods the earlier accounts were written anyway).
The biggest question of all, for those of agnostic leanings, is "Granted that we have a whole array of Nobodaddies, is there actually a real Somebodaddy behind them all?"
I don't believe there is.
As an agnostic I am of the opinion that all religions are manmade creations. However, I suppose a god of some sort could exist in another realm entirely, but humans are not in contact with it.
I am highly unlikely to change the views of those who think the Biblical god is the bees knees, even if they have no evidence to support their belief. The Bible says nothing good about god, however you interpret it. They are entitled to their POV always providing they don't use it as an excuse for bigotry, like castigating gays, or using it in an abusive way by threatening people with hell if they don't convert. Several posters on this forum think homosexuality is wrong, and one or two others seem to drool at the idea of unbelievers roasting in hell
-
As an agnostic I am of the opinion that all religions are manmade creations. However, I suppose a god of some sort could exist in another realm entirely, but humans are not in contact with it.
I am highly unlikely to change the views of those who think the Biblical god is the bees knees, even if they have no evidence to support their belief. The Bible says nothing good about god, however you interpret it. They are entitled to their POV always providing they don't use it as an excuse for bigotry, like castigating gays, or using it in an abusive way by threatening people with hell if they don't convert. Several posters on this forum think homosexuality is wrong, and one or two others seem to drool at the idea of unbelievers roasting in hell
It's also possible that there are Unicorns out there prancing about somewhere, but like the god idea; putting it kindly as pos, it's extreemly unlikely.
ippy
-
There seems to be more evidence for fairies than there is for god. They have been caught on camera a few times, Hmmmmmmmmmmm!
-
The Bible says nothing good about god, however you interpret it.
It plainly does. That does not override the appallingly bad descriptions of god which are there - mostly in the early part, and in Jesus' references to hell etc. . Both (and more) exist in this highly varied collection of texts.
-
It plainly does. That does not override the appallingly bad descriptions of god which are there - mostly in the early part, and in Jesus' references to hell etc. . Both (and more) exist in this highly varied collection of texts.
And what does it say that is good about god?
-
And what does it say that is good about god?
Apparently he gave certain commandments (even in Leviticus, the most boring book on earth) about not harassing foreigners when they're in your country. In Isaiah, we're told to look after poor widows etc. In Micah we're told to love mercy and do justly. And Jesus, as we know, preached loved and forgiveness and non-violence. All these prophets believed they were speaking for God.
Perhaps you think we should all start killing immigrants, acting as unjustly as possible and hating everyone?
Why are you totally unable to look at these ancient texts as just that - a collection of ancient writings with different thoughts on a variety of matters - as well as their representations of god?
-
Apparently he gave certain commandments (even in Leviticus, the most boring book on earth) about not harassing foreigners when they're in your country. In Isaiah, we're told to look after poor widows etc. In Micah we're told to love mercy and do justly. And Jesus, as we know, preached loved and forgiveness and non-violence. All these prophets believed they were speaking for God.
Perhaps you think we should all start killing immigrants, acting as unjustly as possible and hating everyone?
Why are you totally unable to look at these ancient texts as just that - a collection of ancient writings with different thoughts on a variety of matters - as well as their representations of god?
Why should I think we should all start killing migrants, where the heck did you get that one from? I am one who sticks up for the migrants!
-
Why should I think we should all start killing migrants, where the heck did you get that one from? I am one who sticks up for the migrants!
No, Dicky is making the point that were to disagree with the examples he was giving where the Bible describes a good god then that would only make sense if you had morals opposite to those descriptions.
-
One of the striking messages in the Jewish Bible (OT) is that God wants mercy not sacrifice. Some people see this as carrying on into the NT, well, maybe, but it's just part of the Jewish mosaic, which is of course, contradictory, as all good liberal rabbis will tell you.
-
Put yourself in the place of a 6th century BC Israelite. He knows he has offended the creator God by joining in with the new practice of burning incense to baal. The prophet has told him that God will come to punish them. The Babylonians are at the gates of the town and he is about to be captured or worse. The Babylonians have been sent by God to punish them. Yet this Israelite only sees this because he is humble. A Canaanite town however is about to be captured by the Israelites. But the Canaanite isn't humble and so doesn't see it as a holy God sending the Israelites in judgement.
When it says that God did something that we perceive as evil, eg send an army to slaughter men women and children, we may believe this to be evil due to a lack of humility, which prevents us from seeing the situation from God's perspective.
Hence floo's perception of God as evil.
-
Sometimes we don't see God's perspective on an evil event that happens to us until afterwards, because it takes time to become humble and during the event we don't see ourselves as capable of doing wrong.
-
Why should I think we should all start killing migrants, where the heck did you get that one from? I am one who sticks up for the migrants!
Well, Floo, you seem to regard the Judeo-Christian God as evil. For that to be the case, he must be evil through and through, meaning that the huge majority of his instructions - such as caring for each other; for caring for the foreigner in their midst; for caring for the poor, marginalised and widows; etc. - must be evil.
On the day that we commemorate the British Army's most horrendous one-day loss of life - the first day of the Battle of the Somme - we need to remember that the British were responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of Germans over the 5 months the Battle raged. Do we regard the generals and politicians who ordered this massacre as 'evil'?
-
Unfortunately the religious view of a God is reflective of all of human frailties & the negative things we are !!
-
Well, Floo, you seem to regard the Judeo-Christian God as evil. For that to be the case, he must be evil through and through, meaning that the huge majority of his instructions - such as caring for each other; for caring for the foreigner in their midst; for caring for the poor, marginalised and widows; etc. - must be evil.
On the day that we commemorate the British Army's most horrendous one-day loss of life - the first day of the Battle of the Somme - we need to remember that the British were responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of Germans over the 5 months the Battle raged. Do we regard the generals and politicians who ordered this massacre as 'evil'?
The actions attributed to god are wicked if they were for real like the flood. Words are cheap, actions speak volumes.
I don't regard those in charge during WW1 with any favour that is for sure, especially as they were well away from the slaughter!
-
I don't regard them with any favour that is for sure, especially as they were well away from the slaughter!
Not all were "well away from the slaughter". The main 'culprits' were often within a mile or two of the front line.
-
One of the striking messages in the Jewish Bible (OT) is that God wants mercy not sacrifice. Some people see this as carrying on into the NT, well, maybe, but it's just part of the Jewish mosaic, which is of course, contradictory, as all good liberal rabbis will tell you.
Whereas many other rabbis would disagree with them. Notice that I haven't used the term 'conservative' because both theologically and politically, there are large swathes of people between the two extremes.
-
Anyway you are not comparing like with like with like Hope. The WW1 was grim reality, much of what is in the Bible, including the god, is not in all probability.
-
'Cleanliness is next to Godliness' so from what you say, WWl can certainly not be compared to anything Biblical floo ;).
-
'Cleanliness is next to Godliness' so from what you say, WWl can certainly not be compared to anything Biblical floo ;).
Not in my opinion as the Bible isn't reality.
-
Floo, I was having a joke, at your expense of course but not at all nasty - re-read your previous post ;D!
-
On another forum a poster obviously has their head firmly wedged up the bum of their creation of god. They believe that everything god is supposed to have done in the Bible is good, however bad it appears to decent humans. They actually stated that their 'God of Love' is perfectly justified in sending people like me to burn in the fires of hell merely for not believing in it. There are of course at least two posters on R&E who would thoroughly endorse that POV. I realise that viewpoint is very extreme, but common enough, unfortunately.
-
What has that to do with the thread, floo?
You said, "There are of course at least two posters on R&E..."
- muttering darkly about fellow posters again, I've never seen anyone do that about you. If they have something to say, they say it, they don't drop hints. However from what I've seen, most people like you!
Floo, why post on the other forum if it is so awful and why not ignore the "at least two posters" on here? You can't have much in common with any of them. Forum posting is meant to be enjoyable.
-
It has plenty to do with the thread, as it asks why Satan is the bad guy when the Biblical god is worse than any human. What is good about an entity, which would apparently roast people in the fires of hell for nothing more than unbelief, if it exists?
As for those two posters, I am usually on their shoot down in flames list, when they are posting.
Who says posting is meant to be enjoyable? I will always challenge the Christian extremist POV, which does so much harm in this world.
-
Why should I think we should all start killing migrants, where the heck did you get that one from? I am one who sticks up for the migrants!
As NearlySane has kindly explained, it is a logical inference from your stubborn insistence on considering every pronouncement regarding God's nature in the Bible as evil. I quote a text where God in Leviticus is demanding "When a stranger stays in your land you shall not vex him". This is spoken by a prophet of said God. You believe said God to be evil. Therefore you presumably believe the contrary to this demand to be good.
I'd say it was pretty unlikely that you did believe such a stance to be desirable. But it's a logical inference from what you keep repeating ad nauseam.
-
It has plenty to do with the thread, as it asks why Satan is the bad guy when the Biblical god is worse than any human. What is good about an entity, which would apparently roast people in the fires of hell for nothing more than unbelief, if it exists?
These are just differing views about God offered by the highly varied writers in the Bible. The text you allude to above is from the writer of the epistle 1John, if I'm not mistaken. Well, bully for him, and his splenetic theology and the petty-minded little sadists who believe literally in this view.
There are no fires of hell at all in the Old Testament (and only one reference to any sort of afterlife), so again, we are just dealing here with ideas out of people's heads, which contradict each other.
I'm not sure why you should be so bothered, or why you insist on peddling this 'fundamentalism in reverse'.
As far as I'm concerned, there is no God , and that way I'm able to see the Bible as just a collection of (sometimes) interesting texts of very varying views.
-
One of the striking messages in the Jewish Bible (OT) is that God wants mercy not sacrifice. Some people see this as carrying on into the NT, well, maybe, but it's just part of the Jewish mosaic, which is of course, contradictory, as all good liberal rabbis will tell you.
wiggi
I don't know how hidebound orthodox Jews are by OT laws, but as you imply, there is a thread in the OT prophets which continually emphasises mercy over sacrifice, in Amos, Isaiah, and above all in Micah. In these prophets we see a continual desire to see the essentials of a morality to govern human society, stripped of anally-retentive and irrelevant commandments. Unfortunately or fortunately, the arguments continue.
Let's not forget Hillel, who summed up the whole of the Torah whilst standing on one leg......
-
These are just differing views about God offered by the highly varied writers in the Bible. The text you allude to above is from the writer of the epistle 1John, if I'm not mistaken. Well, bully for him, and his splenetic theology and the petty-minded little sadists who believe literally in this view.
There are no fires of hell at all in the Old Testament (and only one reference to any sort of afterlife), so again, we are just dealing here with ideas out of people's heads, which contradict each other.
I'm not sure why you should be so bothered, or why you insist on peddling this 'fundamentalism in reverse'.
As far as I'm concerned, there is no God , and that way I'm able to see the Bible as just a collection of (sometimes) interesting texts of very varying views.
I am well aware that the Bible is a collection of documents written over a long period of time by many authors, who each created their own take on the idea of a god. However their characterisation of god from Genesis onwards does it no favours whatsoever. I suspect by making it so highly unpleasant they were trying to say to those of other beliefs, 'our god is bigger and more powerful than yours.'
-
It has plenty to do with the thread, as it asks why Satan is the bad guy when the Biblical god is worse than any human. What is good about an entity, which would apparently roast people in the fires of hell for nothing more than unbelief, if it exists?
Floo, the problem with your argument is largely to do with language. The Hebrew words often translated 'Hell' in English are 'sheol' and 'hinnom'. Sheol literally means 'the place of the dead' or 'the place of departed souls/spirits'. The New Testament Greek equivalent to sheol is hades, which is also a general reference to “the place of the dead.”
The Greek word gehenna is used in the New Testament for “hell” and is derived from the Hebrew word hinnom.
In the Hebrew Bible, Gehenna was initially where some of the kings of Judah sacrificed their children by fire. [http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6558-gehenna - my addition] Thereafter it was deemed to be cursed (Jer. 7:31, 19:2-6).
In Jewish Rabbinic literature, and Christian and Islamic scripture, Gehenna is a destination of the wicked. This is different from the more neutral Sheol/Hades, the abode of the dead, although the King James Version of the Bible usually translates both with the Anglo-Saxon word Hell.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gehenna
-
I just don't understand why Satan is supposed to be a baddie, but the Biblical god all that is good? The deeds attributed to god are highly unpleasant to say the least, and indicate the entity is very deranged. Although poor Satan is always slagged off, no actual misdeeds have been attributed to him.
Ask a vicar.... if you have one in your family they can explain it to you.
Could you accept that a member of your family does understand why Satan is the baddie?
Could you accept anyone understands why Satan is the baddie.
Do you understand why you cannot accept he is the baddie.
That is the difference and the reason he is the baddie he causes people to die because they never believe the truth.
-
So when did you actually meet Satan then?
-
Ask a vicar.... if you have one in your family they can explain it to you.
Could you accept that a member of your family does understand why Satan is the baddie?
Could you accept anyone understands why Satan is the baddie.
Do you understand why you cannot accept he is the baddie.
That is the difference and the reason he is the baddie he causes people to die because they never believe the truth.
Your understanding seems to leave a lot to be desired! Why is the Biblical god is supposed to be good when all the things attributed to it are so very bad? But of course you can't answer that question.
-
Your understanding seems to leave a lot to be desired! Why is the Biblical god is supposed to be good when all the things attributed to it are so very bad? But of course you can't answer that question.
Again your lack of knowledge and inability to reason what is good and bad really in impeded by the fact you never listen or note what is really being said.
Why haven't you asked someone like a vicar to explain - that is if you ever really wanted to know?
Afraid of the truth, are we?
-
Again your lack of knowledge and inability to reason what is good and bad really in impeded by the fact you never listen or note what is really being said.
Why haven't you asked someone like a vicar to explain - that is if you ever really wanted to know?
Afraid of the truth, are we?
You can reason, can you Sass? Well that is news to me, and probably others too. Your posts don't give the indication of a reasoning mind that is for sure. :D
-
As I said on another post here - it's her LA LA LA I'm not hearing or listening to you - stuff ?!!?!? ;)
Sass has ulterior motives that she's too scared to answer with as she knows they'll just fall apart.
It's a mental condition & something only SASS can face & fix.
Nobody else can force her to face her own demons - only HER !!!
Nick
-
More extreme Christians, like one or two on this forum seem scared to question their faith in case they end up in their creation of the fiery furnace!
-
You can reason, can you Sass? Well that is news to me, and probably others too. Your posts don't give the indication of a reasoning mind that is for sure. :D
The difference between a believer and non believers is that non believers in ignorance are likely to agree with each other.
In the absence of belief and knowledge of belief they are always more likely to be wrong in greater numbers.
So maybe you could reason that through... :)
As a reasoning mind in Christ what are the indications you would know to look for in my posts?
Waits...waits.....waits...
:)
-
As I said on another post here - it's her LA LA LA I'm not hearing or listening to you - stuff ?!!?!? ;)
Sass has ulterior motives that she's too scared to answer with as she knows they'll just fall apart.
It's a mental condition & something only SASS can face & fix.
Nobody else can force her to face her own demons - only HER !!!
Nick
Is that it????
Phew! you are desperate... ;D
You see people have to be bothered about what others write about them to care.
I neither am bother and nor do I care.
What a waste... mind it had no intelligent content or arguments did it?
-
The difference between a believer and non believers is that non believers in ignorance are likely to agree with each other.
In the absence of belief and knowledge of belief they are always more likely to be wrong in greater numbers.
So maybe you could reason that through... :)
As a reasoning mind in Christ what are the indications you would know to look for in my posts?
Waits...waits.....waits...
:)
As a reasoning mind one doesn't look for any sense in your posts, because the ones based on religion are more often than not twaddle! :D
-
My Dear Sassy
Why the H are you on these boards, please tell ?!?!?!