Secular Nativity

[jeremyp]

With all due respect (none), that's probably the most egregious piece of you know what polishing to have appeared on this forum.

I fear for your spiritual welfare.

The serpent in the Garden of Eden was instrumental in giving Adam and Even knowledge of good and evil and helping them to escape eternal slavery in God's garden. Christians (and Jews tbf) have spun that as evil. But only Christians identify the serpent as Satan.

[Sebastian Toe]

As for the principle about not caring whether people are mocked, I'm pretty sure I could test that idea to destruction as far as this forum is concerned, in a matter of seconds.

Open mike, on you go!

[Nearly Sane]

Open mike, on you go!

He's feeling s bit funny...

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The serpent in the Garden of Eden was instrumental in giving Adam and Even knowledge of good and evil and helping them to escape eternal slavery in God's garden.

Sounds like some kind of cosmic Brexit argument

Christians (and Jews tbf) have spun that as evil. But only Christians identify the serpent as Satan.

But the point of reading the bible is to get to the intended meaning and that is that Satan is the enemy of God and man. I don't know therefore from whence you derive yourSatan as liberator thesis is from.
I have heard the argument that the eating of the fruit somehow enhanced intelligence leading to technological advance but that ignores the moral element of the story or equates technological development with good.

[jeremyp]

Sounds like some kind of cosmic Brexit argument

Then you need to get your hearing tested.

But the point of reading the bible is to get to the intended meaning and that is that Satan is the enemy of God and man.

Intended by Christians but not by the writers of the OT stories in which Satan features (The Fall is not one of them).

I don't know therefore from whence you derive yourSatan as liberator thesis is from.

I don't have a "satan as liberator" thesis. Where on Earth did you get that idea from?

And just to be completely clear, because I know comprehension is hard for you, I said "the serpent in the Garden of Eden was instrumental..."

I have emphasised one particular word, and you'll notice it is not "Satan". Satan is not the Serpent. The idea that he is is just Christian wankery.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Then you need to get your hearing tested.Intended by Christians but not by the writers of the OT stories in which Satan features (The Fall is not one of them).I don't have a "satan as liberator" thesis. Where on Earth did you get that idea from?

And just to be completely clear, because I know comprehension is hard for you, I said "the serpent in the Garden of Eden was instrumental..."

I have emphasised one particular word, and you'll notice it is not "Satan". Satan is not the Serpent. The idea that he is is just Christian wankery.

The Bible is the word of man but it is also the word of God so God's intent is also important.
I thought you were trying to sugar your obvious "sympathy for the devil here but aren't so sure now but any confusion or ambiguity about Satan's character here , is yours.

[jeremyp]

The Bible is the word of man but it is also the word of God so God's intent is also important.

The Christian god is a fiction, so it's not his word.

I thought you were trying to sugar your obvious "sympathy for the devil here but aren't so sure now but any confusion or ambiguity about Satan's character here , is yours.

No. It's yours and all modern Christians. The Christian version of Satan is not supported by what the Bible says. And if the Bible is God's intent, then you need to take the plain reading, unless you believe God is some sort of tosser who likes to conceal important information.

[Outrider]

With all due respect (none), that's probably the most egregious piece of you know what polishing to have appeared on this forum.

How many people does Satan kill in scripture? Torture? How many genocides does he call for? How many Pharoahs' hearts does he harden? How many times does he demonstrable lie? How many times does he, quite correctly, ascribe traits like jealousy to himself.

Why is he the villain, again?

I fear for your spiritual welfare.

Of all the possible things in heaven and Earth to fear, I put 'spiritual welfare' on the same shelf as 'being tricked by a Leprechaun', but thanks for the concern nonetheless. I'll take it in the 'spirit' it was meant...

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The Christian god is a fiction, so it's not his word.

Positive assertion. You know what you have to do.

No. It's yours and all modern Christians. The Christian version of Satan is not supported by what the Bible says. And if the Bible is God's intent, then you need to take the plain reading, unless you believe God is some sort of tosser who likes to conceal important information.

Modern Christianity has a greater number of adherents who don’t believe in Satan as an entity or personification and those who believe like the type of atheistic satanist you allude to that he is a metaphor or symbolic.

In terms of plain reading and plain meaning aren’t you actually talking biblical literalism here?
We know it often isn’t useful eliminating the possible use of story, metaphor or symbolism otherwise we end up with caricature.

Not sure about plain reading without study, discussion and consultation. We bring our biases to things after all. What for instance qualifies as a plain reading of say special relativity. In other words it’s possible to read something and still not get the meaning.

Rather than the important information in the bible being hidden I would say it’s resented...rather than hidden

[Walt Zingmatilder]

How many people does Satan kill in scripture? Torture? How many genocides does he call for? How many Pharoahs' hearts does he harden? How many times does he demonstrable lie? How many times does he, quite correctly, ascribe traits like jealousy to himself.

We know that evil is associated with several deaths and we know Satan is present leading up to the crucifixion.

Why is he the villain, again?

I don’t think Satan is portrayed in the bible as God's arch nemesis but the preternatural enemy of man

Of all the possible things in heaven and Earth to fear, I put 'spiritual welfare' on the same shelf as 'being tricked by a Leprechaun',

That I’m afraid is down to a categorical error on your part.

O.
[/quote]

[Outrider]

We know that evil is associated with several deaths and we know Satan is present leading up to the crucifixion.

Is this evil associated with the deaths of:
- Everyone on Earth except Noah, Mrs Noah, Ham, Spam, Jaffa-cake and their wives?
- The occupants of Sodom and Gomorrah?
- Onan?
- The firstborn children in Egypt who didn't have the right picture hung up in the hall?
- Aaron's son for "the wrong kind of fire"?
- That guy picking sticks up on a Saturday?
- The couple of thousand people who complained about the killings?
- The citizens of Jericho?

The list goes on. Deaths attributable to Satan - 10. Job's three daughters and seven sons... and who sent him to do it?

'We' don't know anything of the sort about evil. Evil is a word we put against activities that we see as antithetical to the underlying social mores with which we were raised (much as how I'm railing against these deaths portrayed in the Bible) - evil is not an independent force, or some manifestation that 'infects' people, it's a characterisation of people's choices and actions. That's why Satan needs to be redeemed, because the entire point of Satan - or, at least, the serpent, which is typically considered to be Satan - is that Satan gives the power to humanity, he makes humanity responsible for their own choices in a garden where God tries to keep them ignorant/innocent and under control.

I don’t think Satan is portrayed in the bible as God's arch nemesis but the preternatural enemy of man

Well it would be pointless to try to come up with a Nemesis for an all-powerful, all-knowing deity, look at the trouble they have coming up with Superman villains. He is portrayed as the enemy of mankind, yes, but the point is that this characterisation doesn't really stand up to scrutiny very well. Satan sets humanity free of its shackles, if you choose to look at it from his point of view, having thrown off his own constraints before.

That I’m afraid is down to a categorical error on your part.

Given the absolute lack of any validating evidence for either of them, how can there be categorical errors in the absence of categories?

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Is this evil associated with the deaths of:
- Everyone on Earth except Noah, Mrs Noah, Ham, Spam, Jaffa-cake and their wives?
- The occupants of Sodom and Gomorrah?
- Onan?
- The firstborn children in Egypt who didn't have the right picture hung up in the hall?
- Aaron's son for "the wrong kind of fire"?
- That guy picking sticks up on a Saturday?
- The couple of thousand people who complained about the killings?
- The citizens of Jericho?

Flagrant whataboutery... I think you’ll find also that everybody NOT mentioned in these categories died. The question then reduces to why death? Of course the Bible makes it clear that death is not the end but spiritual state is important.

The list goes on. Deaths attributable to Satan - 10. Job's three daughters and seven sons... and who sent him to do it?

I don’t think we can draw any picture that Satan is God’s faithful servant awaiting his Generals orders here. It is the spiritual damage and temptations which are destructive.
Secondly, your interpretation puts Satan in the same category as the supposedly genocidal Israelite armies of the OT and yet you are positive towards Satan giving him almost Cosmic importance as a liberator vis

'We' don't know anything of the sort about evil. Evil is a word we put against activities that we see as antithetical to the underlying social mores with which we were raised (much as how I'm railing against these deaths portrayed in the Bible) - evil is not an independent force, or some manifestation that 'infects' people, it's a characterisation of people's choices and actions. That's why Satan needs to be redeemed, because the entire point of Satan - or, at least, the serpent, which is typically considered to be Satan - is that Satan gives the power to humanity, he makes humanity responsible for their own choices in a garden where God tries to keep them ignorant/innocent and under control.

Here you are prepared to exonerate the murderer Satan for supposedly some great service... wasn’t it God who laid out the choice. Isn’t it God who makes people responsible for their choices? According to you God can’t grant free will but Satan does??

[Outrider]

Flagrant whataboutery...

Pointing out God's body-count against Satan's is 'whataboutery'? I hope you don't called for Jury Service!

I think you’ll find also that everybody NOT mentioned in these categories died.

Right... murder and genocide are fine, because everyone dies anyway. Good to know that Satan is the embodiment of evil, because one could get confused reading that.

The question then reduces to why death? Of course the Bible makes it clear that death is not the end but spiritual state is important.

No, it doesn't 'make it clear', it claims it on the basis of 'don't ask questions, this is holy, and if you mess with holy we kill you, because god loves you'.

I don’t think we can draw any picture that Satan is God’s faithful servant awaiting his Generals orders here.

Not by the end, no, it's a story of rebellion against tyrannical authoritarianism, but that rebellion is a third act thing. You need to build up to it, the hero has to fall before he can pick himself up.

It is the spiritual damage and temptations which are destructive.

And that's different from the Leprechaun's gold how, exactly?

Secondly, your interpretation puts Satan in the same category as the supposedly genocidal Israelite armies of the OT and yet you are positive towards Satan giving him almost Cosmic importance as a liberator visHere you are prepared to exonerate the murderer Satan for supposedly some great service... wasn’t it God who laid out the choice. Isn’t it God who makes people responsible for their choices? According to you God can’t grant free will but Satan does??

Do I get to avoid that question by dropping the 'whataboutery' horseshit bomb? God is supposed to be good, following his orders is supposed to be good. Satan grows, Satan changes, and realises that following these rules is not 'good' or even 'evil', it's abrogating responsibility for decisions on good and evil to someone else (God, in this case) and being part and parcel of their decisions with no agency. Satan frees himself, and then frees us.

O.

[jeremyp]

Positive assertion. You know what you have to do.

The concept of a god that makes a rule that "the wages of sin are death" and makes it impossible to forgive people without transforming himself into a human and exploiting a loophole in his own rule to die but then come alive again is an incoherent concept.

Modern Christianity has a greater number of adherents who don’t believe in Satan as an entity or personification and those who believe like the type of atheistic satanist you allude to that he is a metaphor or symbolic.

Do you count yourself in that group? If so, why are we even having this argument?

In terms of plain reading and plain meaning aren’t you actually talking biblical literalism here?

A plain reading just means the meaning is what the words on the page convey. It doesn't mean the story has to be true.

Not sure about plain reading without study, discussion and consultation. We bring our biases to things after all. What for instance qualifies as a plain reading of say special relativity. In other words it’s possible to read something and still not get the meaning.

It should be possible to understand "God's word" without needing study and discussion and consultation. What you are saying here is that, if the Bible is God's word, he is shit at communication.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The concept of a god that makes a rule that "the wages of sin are death" and makes it impossible to forgive people without transforming himself into a human and exploiting a loophole in his own rule to die but then come alive again is an incoherent concept.

Again, another positive assertion. I look forward to your justification. As well as forgiveness, this has imo to be a universe which works on consequences and of course there is God’s interest in justice and restitution. Your idea that sin has no lasting consequences on the sinner and your idea that you can just say, you are forgiven imo bypasses the notion of justice since what you propose is indistinguishable from turning a blind eye

Do you count yourself in that group?

Not exactly, nor do I consider Satan to be God’s nemesis. I believe there are manifestations of antitheism andI antichristianity That go beyond what might be termed normal and beyond standard ego interest and that can only be couched in a personal agent. I can sympathise with those who might view evil and the devil as a kind of spiritual force or metaphor but praising it, calling it a positive thing is a different thing altogether.

It should be possible to understand "God's word" without needing study and discussion and consultation. What you are saying here is that, if the Bible is God's word, he is shit at communication.

The essential thing, our need for forgiveness and God’s forgiving are perfectly clear... and resented. But that doesn’t mean it doesn’t need God, discussion, study and external knowledge and internal attitude to approach other parts.

[Stranger]

Again, another positive assertion. I look forward to your justification. As well as forgiveness, this has imo to be a universe which works on consequences and of course there is God’s interest in justice and restitution. Your idea that sin has no lasting consequences on the sinner and your idea that you can just say, you are forgiven imo bypasses the notion of justice since what you propose is indistinguishable from turning a blind eye

I can't see that anybody has suggested what comes after the "Your idea..." in your post, so it appears that the Vlad strawman factory is back up to full production.

It is barking mad for a God to make it impossible for people not to 'sin', then condemn them for doing so, and then uses a bizarre and equally unjust loophole so it can make itself human, get itself tortured to death, doesn't stay dead, but nevertheless somehow this twisted sadomasochistic nonsense makes it possible for people to be forgiven for being how God had made them, without any consequences for them, but only if they believe all this insane nonsense.

That people insist on trying to justify this insanity is testament to how faith can destroy reasoning, and even a sense of justice.

The essential thing, our need for forgiveness and God’s forgiving are perfectly clear... and resented.

But this isn't true either. When I first read the bible all the way through, I was struck not by this message, or any other, for that matter, but by how disjointed, incoherent, and contradictory it was. And no, that wasn't what I expected. I was young and naive enough to expect to see the clear Christian message.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Right... murder and genocide are fine, because everyone dies anyway.

I’m merely pointing out that in your scheme of things, God murders everyone...So it is really down to you to explain why you seem to be specially pleading certain instances.

Not by the end, no, it's a story  of rebellion against tyrannical authoritarianism,

No it isn’t...or to put it another way, you need to explain where the tyranny is and why devotion, adherence, admiration and worship of Satan is not tyrannical.





O.
[/quote]

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I can't see that anybody has suggested what comes after the "Your idea..." in your post, so it appears that the Vlad strawman factory is back up to full production.

But then you haven’t had the conversations Jeremy and I have had

It is barking mad for a God to make it impossible for people not to 'sin',

So you admit that people do sin?

then condemn them for doing so,

That’s only half true though since God forgives also. The Bible gives two instances when people didn’t sin or were bound by it’s consequences namely the first humans and the life of Jesus Christ. Christ pays the price of your sin and takes the consequences of it restoring the open way to God which is ours to take or refuse.

[Stranger]

But then you haven’t had the conversations Jeremy and I have had

I looked through this conversation, and didn't find the suggestion. Can point me to it, if I missed it?

So you admit that people do sin?

It's not a word I would use, hence the scare quotes. People clearly do things that are morally wrong, but, according to the bible, so does God.

That’s only half true though since God forgives also.

I dealt with the insanity of how your brutal, cruel, unjust, and twisted God goes about forgiving people, and it doesn't negate the fact that we are "created sick and commanded to be well".

Christ pays the price of your sin and takes the consequences of it restoring the open way to God which is ours to take or refuse.

And since when has a senseless substitute human pseudo-sacrifice (hed didn't stay dead) been remotely just or fair, let alone for simply forgiving us for being the way God made us in the first place?

You worship a monster.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

It's not a word I would use, hence the scare quotes. People clearly do things that are morally wrong, but, according to the bible, so does God.

Interesting that you find these words scary.

I dealt with the insanity of how your brutal, cruel, unjust, and twisted God goes about forgiving people, and it doesn't negate the fact that we are "created sick and commanded to be well".

Unjust means either the penalties are too high or too low or that no actual wrong is committed.
You’ve already agreed that people do do wrong so there is no question of innocence.
Not imposing a penalty is therefore unjust so you are left with the necessity for a penalty.

Either the wrongdoer pays or the costs are absorbed by whoever has been wronged and justice demands those costs are paid in full otherwise injustice remains. I think such injustice is part of any alternative to Jesus self sacrifice you could offer

And since when has a senseless substitute human pseudo-sacrifice (hed didn't stay dead) been remotely just or fair, let alone for simply forgiving us for being the way God made us in the first place?

As has been demonstrate justice comes when the costs of wrong doing are satisfied. The sense of that is demonstrated. Anything else is indistinguishable from turning a blind eye to wrong doing.

[Stranger]

Interesting that you find these words scary.

Look it up: scare quotes.
 

Unjust means either the penalties are too high or too low or that no actual wrong is committed.
You’ve already agreed that people do do wrong so there is no question of innocence.
Not imposing a penalty is therefore unjust so you are left with the necessity for a penalty.

The actual injustice here is that we are being held to a standard that it is impossible for us to live up to. If we are all 'sinners', then that's a design flaw or the standard for 'sin' has been set too high for humans to live up to.

As has been demonstrate justice comes when the costs of wrong doing are satisfied. The sense of that is demonstrated.

There is zero sense, and zero justice in God turning itself into a human, getting itself tortured to death, then only saying dead for three days, off back up to heaven, and then, as if by magic, we can be forgiven, but only if we believe this absurd nonsense.

It is totally fucking insane!

[jeremyp]

Again, another positive assertion.

Agreed and true.

I look forward to your justification.

It's utterly bonkers.

How can you posit a god that makes a rule that any sin needs too be paid for with death and yet is relaxed enough to say that it could be one death to cover all the sins but the one death is a cheat and that's somehow good enough?

It's obvious nonsense on its face and you would just laugh at it were it to come from any religion but your own.

As well as forgiveness, this has imo to be a universe which works on consequences and of course there is God’s interest in justice and restitution.

He has no interest in justice and restitution. Otherwise you wouldn't be able to get away with your sins just by turning to Christ.

Your idea that sin has no lasting consequences on the sinner

No. That's a Christian idea. 

It doesn't make any sense whatever and so is obviously made up.

[Outrider]

I’m merely pointing out that in your scheme of things, God murders everyone...So it is really down to you to explain why you seem to be specially pleading certain instances.

People dying at the end of their life - even if that lifespan is determined by natural laws instituted by God, is not the same as actively being massacred as a child. If I have to explain that, we're really going to struggle with getting a coherent sense of morality from you.

No it isn’t...or to put it another way, you need to explain where the tyranny is and why devotion, adherence, admiration and worship of Satan is not tyrannical.

The tyranny is in the 'love me or suffer for eternity' bit. The tyranny is in the 'you weren't born in the right tribe, so your infant death is not just acceptable but required'. The tyranny is in the arbitrary nature of the 'moral' precepts and proscriptions - slavery is acceptable, murder is wrong (until God decides arbitrarily that it's not murder, just killing, then it's fine), but homosexuality, bad haircuts and certain agricultural choices are unforgivable breaches of protocol, and let's not even get started on the seafood (prior to the Roman Empire, of course, when suddenly paella's absolutely fucking peachy - but still none of the same-sex friends stuff).

Why is devotion, admiration and worship of Satan not tyrannical - but it's not a requirement. Satan is demanding it for survival, it's not mandated that you should suffer if you don't. The tyrant bit of the tyranny is missing. Satan offers choice, freedom. God offers a tarnished golden shackle.

O.





O.
[/quote]

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Look it up: scare quotes.

So someone else is telling you these are scary

The actual injustice here is that we are being held to a standard that it is impossible for us to live up to. If we are all 'sinners', then that's a design flaw or the standard for 'sin' has been set too high for humans to live up to.

Humans aren’t designed to break faith and trust with God They chose to do it themselves. The result constitutes Sin as in alienation from God. Specific sins or wrong doings are the symptoms of that choice. The job of Christ is to counteract that disseminated alienation from God so that people can and do live lives unalienated from God.

There is zero sense, and zero justice in God turning itself into a human, getting itself tortured to death, then only saying dead for three days, off back up to heaven, and then, as if by magic, we can be forgiven, but only if we believe this absurd nonsense.

That’s just plain nonsense Stranger. The Christian belief is that all will be ressurected. That we will all just be temporarily dead before being raised to judgment. Having no penalty for wrong doing or insufficient penalty or consequence constitutes zero justice.

[Outrider]

Humans aren’t designed to break faith and trust with God They chose to do it themselves.

Either the tendency was inherited from Adam, if you follow that line of thinking (in which case it's possibly Adam and Eve's fault, but we've just inherited it, you don't blame or punish people for their inherited traits). Or we were designed with this tendency - but if we're all sinners, the eight billion of us alive at the moment and the hundred or so billion that came before us, save one special case, then that's not 'choice', that's a deliberate design choice or a cataclysmic design flaw.

The result constitutes Sin as in alienation from God.

According to whom? That's your take, there's plenty of Christians out there who are ready to explain that the wages of sin are eternal damnation, lakes of fire and an overseer with a pointy stick.

Specific sins or wrong doings are the symptoms of that choice.

Like being gay? Like eating shellfish? Like having poly-blend shirts? Like not honouring abusive parents? But not slave-owning. Not rape. Not killing, if God wants that person dead. Why are we worrying about arbitrary rules like sin when the whole 'knowledge of good and evil' thing is that we have a sense of morality?

The job of Christ is to counteract that disseminated alienation from God so that people can and do live lives unalienated from God.

Why? Why is blood sacrifice necessary? Why is Jesus death temporary inconvenience on the cross necessary? How does Jesus dying somehow make me less culpable? In what way is this not a magic spell? If Jesus' has done this already, why do I need to give a shit now, my 'sins' have already been forgiven, I can have all the square haircuts I want.

That’s just plain nonsense Stranger. The Christian belief is that all will be ressurected.

What's nonsense is the idea that there is 'A' Christian belief. There are Christians who believe that we'll all be resurrected, Christians that believe some will and some won't, some that believer there will be 4000 or so saved and the rest get a really long barbecue.

That we will all just be temporarily dead before being raised to judgment. Having no penalty for wrong doing or insufficient penalty or consequence constitutes zero justice.

Having no choice on participation constitutes zero justice. Being condemned by nature constitutes no justice. Having arbitrary rules with no consistent relationship to morality constitutes no justice. Having no say in the lawmaking process constitutes zero justice. We've already been judged, we're all already sinners, we're saved not by deeds or words but by the grace of God, right? That's 'THE' Christian belief.

O.