Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Theism and Atheism => Topic started by: Walt Zingmatilder on November 04, 2017, 11:27:48 AM
-
I have heard the Christian God referred to as The most evil character in fiction.
I disagree. The most evil character in fiction would be an atheist murderer surely.
What do others think?
-
Milton's Satan, in 'Paradise Lost'.
-
I have heard the Christian God referred to as The most evil character in fiction.
I disagree. The most evil character in fiction would be an atheist murderer surely.
What do others think?
The Biblical god is worse than any human, however bad. Satan could be no worse. Hopefully neither exist in reality.
-
The Biblical god is worse than any human, however bad. Satan could be no worse. Hopefully neither exist in reality.
I'm with you on that one Floo
-
I have heard the Christian God referred to as The most evil character in fiction.
I disagree. The most evil character in fiction would be an atheist murderer surely.
What do others think?
Does that make a fictional Christian murderer one or more steps down the table of evil fictional characters as defined by yourself?
-
Does that make a fictional Christian murderer one or more steps down the table of evil fictional characters as defined by yourself?
I think with God there is possible resurrection and forgiveness.
An atheist murderer destroys in the belief that their destruction of others is final and permanent.
Atheist murderers are to other atheists the real menace.
-
I think with God there is possible resurrection and forgiveness.
An atheist murderer destroys in the belief that their destruction of others is final and permanent.
Atheist murderers are to other atheists the real menace.
Is that a yes or a no?
-
The most evil character in fiction would be an atheist murderer surely.
Why is an atheist murderer any worse than a Christian one, or a Muslim one, or an agnostic one.
Surely the hierarchy of murderers in terms of 'evilness' would be based on how many they kill, who they kill and the cruelty of their method of murder rather than their religious belief or otherwise.
-
I'd think a murderer with a religious belief system would be the worst, he/she would use belief as a shield and that must be tantamount to blaspheming against the holy spirit (or equivalent in non-Christian belief).
-
I'd think a murderer with a religious belief system would be the worst, he/she would use belief as a shield and that must be tantamount to blaspheming against the holy spirit (or equivalent in non-Christian belief).
I think they would be the same.
But actually the whole argument is moot as the point about a fictional character is that they don't exist so their murders are non existent and their evilness is also no existent in a literal sense. So actually the most evil fictional character would be one that causes evil acts to occur in real life.
-
(I got a bit carried away in last post actually forgetting we were talking about fiction.)
Prof:- "So actually the most evil fictional character would be one that causes evil acts to occur in real life."
You mean by influencing people in real life? I understand that because I do think some of us are influenced by fiction. In fact I was sometimes influenced by characters in books when I was young, I liked them very much but thankfully never violent characters. I hated them, still do in books and drama no matter how interesting.
-
Grand Moff Tarkin once destroyed an entire Earth sized planet and everybody on it just to advertise the effectiveness of a new weapon. I think that makes Bible God's exploits rather trivial in comparison.
-
The embodiment of entropy, Imperiex takes the form of pure energy contained inside a humanoid set of armor, colossal in size. Since the dawn of time, he has repeatedly destroyed the universe to create a new one from the ashes of the old.
-
The Biblical god is worse than any human, however bad. Satan could be no worse. Hopefully neither exist in reality.
Stand back in amazement! What a shockingly original thought! I bet no-one's ever said that before!
-
Stand back in amazement! What a shockingly original thought! I bet no-one's ever said that before!
Agreed........I think we're looking for something more.
-
Stand back in amazement! What a shockingly original thought! I bet no-one's ever said that before!
Produce another fictional character which is as bad.
-
Grand Moff Tarkin once destroyed an entire Earth sized planet and everybody on it just to advertise the effectiveness of a new weapon. I think that makes Bible God's exploits rather trivial in comparison.
But what about that bloke on Tbe Force Awakens who destroyed several planets? And were they both atheists?
And is instant obliteration worse than eternal torture with wailing and gnashing of teeth for unbelievers?
-
Produce another fictional character which is as bad.
Milton's Satan.
-
Milton's Satan.
Milton's Satan as bad as the OT God?
You jest.
-
Milton's Satan.
No you are wrong, imo.
-
No you are wrong, imo.
Why? How about, for once in your life, backing up a statement of opinion with reasons?
-
Why? How about, for once in your life, backing up a statement of opinion with reasons?
Read the Bible!
-
I think with God there is possible resurrection and forgiveness.
Not with the God of the Pentateuch, and several other parts of the OT (but not all). Quite a few here are being simplistic and generalising - Floo as expected, but others as well. Not sure how you stand on the horrors of Noah's story, the whole of Joshua etc and some ghastly passages in Numbers. I'm also not sure how you stand on Jesus' remarks about Hades or Gehenna either, which have often been explained away as metaphors, but others are more literal in their approach.
The New Testament could be seen (if so interpreted) as worse than the Old, since with the latter - apart from a bit of the Book of Daniel - rewards and punishments come in this life.
-
It’s not easy to treat this thread seriously, Dicky.
-
It’s not easy to treat this thread seriously, Dicky.
Ah well - I just thought I'd try to urge people to consider the Bible as a collection of books - indeed a library - with different authors having very different thoughts about 'God', rather than considering it just one book about one central character - which is a very fundamentalist outlook, even when atheists start banging on about it.
-
I'm also not sure how you stand on Jesus' remarks about Hades or Gehenna either, which have often been explained away as metaphors, but others are more literal in their approach.
The New Testament could be seen (if so interpreted) as worse than the Old, since with the latter - apart from a bit of the Book of Daniel - rewards and punishments come in this life.
Multiple passages in the OT heavily hint and at times skirt around denying an afterlife altogether; it doesn't seem to have been part of historical Judaism. Whatever befell people happened here and now in this life. The idea of sheol seems to have been a latter addition; a dim, shadowy underworld after death - not at all dissimilar to that posited by the ancient Greeks- to which all went at death irrespective of their acts in life. There's no suggestion of reward or punishment; this is strictly a one size fits all afterlife. Martyr and murderer get the same gloomy smoke-like existence a bit like the Dead Marshes in Lord of the Rings.
Orthodox Judaism makes much of olam haBa (the world to come) but Rabbi Julia Neuberger* concedes that a great many Jews are "a bit shaky" on a posthumous state. Life here and now and what happens in it or with it is the only stage of which we can be certain.
I forget who it was who said that purely earthly tyrants and dictators - the Hitlers, the Stalins, the Pol Pots and so forth - seek only to kill their enemies and be done with it. As terrible as that is, that's that. Death will do. The God of the NT however insists on pursuing those deemed wicked into the next world and punishing, in fact torturing them there.
* On Being Jewish.
-
Ah well - I just thought I'd try to urge people to consider the Bible as a collection of books - indeed a library - with different authors having very different thoughts about 'God', rather than considering it just one book about one central character - which is a very fundamentalist outlook, even when atheists start banging on about it.
I agree, it's quite funny trying to see how people try and make the Song of Solomon work with the 'one book' theory.
-
Produce another fictional character which is as bad.
I already did: Grand Moff Tarkin.
-
But what about that bloke on Tbe Force Awakens who destroyed several planets? And were they both atheists?
And is instant obliteration worse than eternal torture with wailing and gnashing of teeth for unbelievers?
I didn't claim Grand Moff Tarkin is the most evil person in all fiction, only that he was more evil than Bible God.
-
I didn't claim Grand Moff Tarkin is the most evil person in all fiction, only that he was more evil than Bible God.
That still leaves Rhiannon's point about obliteration versus eternal torture, surely?
-
Vlad,
I have heard the Christian God referred to as The most evil character in fiction.
I disagree. The most evil character in fiction would be an atheist murderer surely.
What do others think?
I think you're trying the same casual slur by association you try with phrases like "secular Stalinism".
What's an "atheist murderer" exactly, or is the "atheist" bit no more relevant here than it would be if you were to describe, say, an atheist juggler?
-
Vlad,
I think you're trying the same casual slur by association you try with phrases like "secular Stalinism".
What's an "atheist murderer" exactly, or is the "atheist" bit no more relevant here than it would be if you were to describe, say, an atheist juggler?
Atheist jugglers - there's no balls involved, you know ;)
-
That still leaves Rhiannon's point about obliteration versus eternal torture, surely?
Hmm, yes, but it is not at all certain that Bible god has eternal torture, at least not Old Testament Bible god.
-
Hmm, yes, but it is not at all certain that Bible god has eternal torture, at least not Old Testament Bible god.
I suppose, if Bible god, doesn't do eternal torture, you could reinvent him so he does, because it is fiction. On the other hand, I could invent a version of Grand Moff Tarkin that blows up a planet and also subjects everybody to eternal torture. Slippery stuff, this fiction.
-
Hmm, yes, but it is not at all certain that Bible god has eternal torture, at least not Old Testament Bible god.
Shaker and I have made this point - that eternal torture (or eternal anything, except Old Nobodaddy) is not indicated in the OT.
It could be argued that this doctrine is present in the New. I don't know that Rhiannon was referring specifically to any particular testament, and I'm pretty sure she's well informed enough to be aware of the way divine rewards and punishments are meted out in each respective testament - unlike a lot of believing Christians
-
Multiple passages in the OT heavily hint and at times skirt around denying an afterlife altogether; it doesn't seem to have been part of historical Judaism. Whatever befell people happened here and now in this life. The idea of sheol seems to have been a latter addition; a dim, shadowy underworld after death - not at all dissimilar to that posited by the ancient Greeks- to which all went at death irrespective of their acts in life. There's no suggestion of reward or punishment; this is strictly a one size fits all afterlife. Martyr and murderer get the same gloomy smoke-like existence a bit like the Dead Marshes in Lord of the Rings.
Orthodox Judaism makes much of olam haBa (the world to come) but Rabbi Julia Neuberger* concedes that a great many Jews are "a bit shaky" on a posthumous state. Life here and now and what happens in it or with it is the only stage of which we can be certain.
I forget who it was who said that purely earthly tyrants and dictators - the Hitlers, the Stalins, the Pol Pots and so forth - seek only to kill their enemies and be done with it. As terrible as that is, that's that. Death will do. The God of the NT however insists on pursuing those deemed wicked into the next world and punishing, in fact torturing them there.
* On Being Jewish.
Nice scholarly post, with which I agree entirely (especially liked the last paragraph). I think it is worthwhile now and again to remind believers that those of us who do not share the faith are probably just as well informed in biblical matters (probably more so) than many who believe. JP Rh NS and yourself are all sterling chaps and chappess.
-
Milton's Satan, in 'Paradise Lost'.
I supposed it's a truism that the English Romantics (particularly the poets) saw Milton's Satan as the archetypal Romantic hero, rebelling against an unjust creator. A bit like Prometheus - whose influence on creative artists was even wider (e.g. Beethoven).
Blake was perhaps the first to obliquely suggest that Milton was not exactly painting God in a very appealing light:
"The reason Milton wrote in fetters when he wrote of Angels and God, and at liberty when of Devils and Hell, is because he was a true Poet and of the Devil's party without knowing it."
Shelley, naturally enough, wrote of his sympathy for Satan as a true hero - and of course he wrote his own version of the Prometheus myth.
Why do you think Milton's Satan is such a bad lot?
-
I supposed it's a truism that the English Romantics (particularly the poets) saw Milton's Satan as the archetypal Romantic hero, rebelling against an unjust creator. A bit like Prometheus - whose influence on creative artists was even wider (e.g. Beethoven).
Blake was perhaps the first to obliquely suggest that Milton was not exactly painting God in a very appealing light:
"The reason Milton wrote in fetters when he wrote of Angels and God, and at liberty when of Devils and Hell, is because he was a true Poet and of the Devil's party without knowing it."
Shelley, naturally enough, wrote of his sympathy for Satan as a true hero - and of course he wrote his own version of the Prometheus myth.
I don't know that it's widespread enough to be classed as any kind of NRM (New Religious Movement) though there are a very few more or less official organisations espousing it - perhaps it's more of a philosophical stance - but there's certainly an ethos or attitude known as Luciferianism. This has precisely zero to do with Satanism: this sees Lucifer in much the terms you've described above - as a rebel, certainly, but a rebel on the side of humanity; a non serviam kind of figure, a bringer not merely of light but of enlightenment; an independent thinker, a go-it-alone type. Much to commend it, in my opinion.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luciferianism
Also worth a look:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucifer_and_Prometheus
-
Atheist jugglers - there's no balls involved, you know ;)
That's the problem with atheist anything.
-
Just pulling your leg.