Why is Satan the bad guy?

[floo]

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.

[Brownie]

That is what ippy said, if not in those words.
So why worry?

[Maeght]

Its probably based on a gut feeling though, so must be right.

[floo]

Where is the verifiable evidence to support the existence of Satan and god? No one has ever provided any.

[Maeght]

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.

[floo]

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?

[Maeght]

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?

Of course not, but people do, and was just using your logic from the Oscar Pistorious thread. Thought that was obvious to be honest.

[floo]

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!

[Brownie]

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.

[Maeght]

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!

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.

[floo]

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.

[Brownie]

I respect that floo.

(The rest removed because I wasn't very sensitive)

[trippymonkey]

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

[floo]

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!

[floo]

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.

[Brownie]

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.

[Dicky Underpants]

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.

[wigginhall]

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!

[Brownie]

It sounds very Jewish wigginhall.

[floo]

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.

[Dicky Underpants]

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.

[floo]

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

[ippy]

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

[floo]

There seems to be more evidence for fairies than there is for god. They have been caught on camera a few times, Hmmmmmmmmmmm!

[Dicky Underpants]

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.