It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

In Christianity, Why is Satan Evil, and God Good? What is Evil?

page: 7
20
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by John Matrix
reply to post by CHA0S
 


Try me if you like.


OK, please go to my thread and answer all of the 8 questions re Genesis. Nobody has done that yet. Thank you in advance.

www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by John Matrix
Today I set before you life or death, a blessing of a curse.


What would you rather be? A pillar of salt or father of two tribes/bribes you brought forth in bed with your daughters?

What would you rather be? Dead for having been married to an angel, or ever known or concidered to be inbreeding his descendants and for having saved that horrible crocodile?

What would it be?

[edit on 21/10/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 03:46 PM
link   
OP, imho all the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Islam and Christianity) made a major mistake when their proponents tried to personalize and humanize god. It led to massive failures and inconsistencies in logic. Your initial question is very valid and shows me that your are thinking and not merely following a given tradition. Bravo!



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 03:54 PM
link   
The flood happened due to the Moon getting closer or perhaps even hitting the Earth, leading to continental shift and extreme tidal and vapor downfall, due to sudden shift in all-world temperature fall and grvitational and electromagnetic interference. Back then people had a tendency to give gods of all kinds the blames for all kinds of natural disasters or cataclysms. The word thunder derives from the Norse god of thunder and black smithing, Thor, the source of madness in Spain also comes from Norse, loco - Loki, the mad god, father of the Midgard serpent and the Fenris wolf.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:08 PM
link   
One theory of Christianity is this;

Devil=evil

God=good

See the similarity?



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
The simple answer is that the God and the Satan spoken of in the Bible are neither the Alpha and Omega of our reality and existence i.e the real God.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
We now know that being above the clouds (heaven) would be a torturous existance because of the cold. Being below the ground (hell) would be a much nicer afterlife because of the warmth.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
We now know that being above the clouds (heaven) would be a torturous existance because of the cold. Being below the ground (hell) would be a much nicer afterlife because of the warmth.


Or perhaps heat would be a better word. Guess you plan to live forever inside the Earth where temperatures reach 7000 degrees Kelvin. Good luck in Hell dude. Don't forget your asbestos suit!

And at those temperatures water is explosive, and under such pressure oxygen is poisenous, so.... Guess it's better up there after all ey?

[edit on 21/10/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by silver tongue devil
The simple answer is that the God and the Satan spoken of in the Bible are neither the Alpha and Omega of our reality and existence i.e the real God.


Apologies if this was already covered, I'm late coming to this conversation.

Sounds a lot like the gnostic concept of the Demiurge

Link: en.wikipedia.org...




In Gnosticism, the Demiurge is a being that never should have come into existence, the result of Sophia emanating without her male counterpart.

The Gnostics attributed to the Demiurge much of the actions and laws that in the Tanach or Old Testament are attributed to the Hebrew God Yahweh.

In contrast to Plato, several systems of Gnostic thought present the demiurge as antagonistic to the will of the Supreme Being: his act of creation occurs in unconscious semblance of the divine model, and thus is fundamentally flawed, or else is formed with the malevolent intention of entrapping aspects of the divine in materiality. Thus, in such systems, the demiurge acts as a solution to the problem of evil. In the Apocryphon of John circa 200 AD, the demiurge has the name “Yaldabaoth,” and proclaims himself as God:

"Now the archon (ruler) who is weak has three names. The first name is Yaltabaoth, the second is Saklas (“fool”), and the third is Samael. And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, ‘I am God and there is no other God beside me,’ for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come."



I'm an (a)gnostic but was raised in the Christian tradition; maybe because of that upbringing this makes sense to me.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:33 PM
link   
I am not claiming to understand it all, but, I have pondered this myself, so…

First, every time people say God, it does not mean the God of Jesus.
Were not innocents enslaved. The option of choice was there. Why didn’t Pharaoh just let them go. It can also be viewed as retribution. Would not a father protect his child, children. There are always two sides to every story. He also was upholding His covenant.

If it can not be purified, what good is it? People had become so polluted, I think it was necessary. Look around today, are we not close to that? FYI, they were babies.

Again, people do all sorts of things and claim that they are doing God’s will, it is a lie. Those are the workers of Satan, the father of lies. There are murderers, and various kinds of evil perpetrated that are covered up (by Satan) and lives messed up (by Satan) and people slandered (by Satan) who will most likely never be prosecuted by a peoples law. Satan does not advertise, he beguiles people. Remember, he disguises himself as an angel of light. However, the true God has a way of balancing all of Satan’s sorcery. There is no hand that can stop the true God’s retribution, but, He is slow to anger and patient.

Do not confuse love with lust. That is another trick of Satan. It also says that a man should not lie with a beast, but, they did and the offspring of that union is in control of our world today.

“Lean not on your own understanding”. If you keep studying this, you will find the truth about it, but, my two cents worth, hold on to your judgement about it until then.

Considering Job, that was because Satan challenged God. It was to prove to Satan that nothing he could do would change Job into his follower. Today, people willing, maybe not knowingly, follow Satan. If one stays on the path of truth it will lead to the true God.

Some people store their own blood now days. Mixing the blood with Satan’s seed can not be undone. It would be like mixing DNA. God is trying to tell you something. He also says “to the pure, all things are pure, but, not all things are beneficial”.

Satan has polluted the world. All disease is his handywork. He is the father of lies and the author of confusion. He is the one that prevents some from understanding "the simplicity of Christ".



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImplausibleDeniability
"Now the archon (ruler) who is weak has three names. The first name is Yaltabaoth, the second is Saklas (“fool”), and the third is Samael. And he is impious in his arrogance which is in him. For he said, ‘I am God and there is no other God beside me,’ for he is ignorant of his strength, the place from which he had come."


Yaltabaoth is related to the Hebrew words for child and virgin, Saklas is discribed, and Samael is the name of Satan before the fall. He was the rider of the blind dragon, and the male counterpart of Lilith, Adam's first wife andf the serpent in Eden.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 


You're saying Satan was the male counterpart to Lilith? Wouldn't Adam be the male counterpart to Lilith...since Lilith was the first women and Adam the first man?

I have heard Lilith as the serpent. You're saying it was in fact Satan? There seems to be some controversy on who the snake was.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 


You're right of course, the bible doesn't support gnostic thinking for sure.

The Council of Nicea kinda made sure of that, to say the least.


Which is actually maybe a really good point to bring up!?

Many Christians believe the Bible to be the infallible non-negotiable word of God. That belief unfortunately just can't hold up to scrutiny when held up to the documented tradition of editing, revision, and removal of entire books and points of view.

One the one hand, you could say the bible is a changing document over the years and, as a result, come to take what you read in the context in which it was written...to me this is a necessity to understanding.

On the other hand, you could argue that since much of what early Christians believed is no longer accepted as true Christianity, that what we currently understand as the infallible word of God has in fact been filtered, interpreted, and warped to suit human needs.

In both cases, and I truly believe this to be true, being a Christian requires thought, interpretation, and a questing heart.

IMO too many people who profess themselves to be true Christians are quite diametrically opposed to the idea of challenging their beliefs.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
Samael was the name of Satan before God turned him into Sataniel and again, cutting him off further by giving him the name Satan, the very word Enemy. Samael was according to my interpretation of the Zohar and Kabalah the male counterpart (i.e. twin brother) of Lilith, who in turn was married and divorced to Adam before Adam denounced his androgynous nature and made God change his genetic structure so the male ability to conceive children was left to Eve since Adam despised being subdued by Lilith and rather wanted to be in control "riding a blind dragon", just like Samael.

[edit on 21/10/2009 by Neo Christian Mystic]



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by CHA0S
so I think we can agree in any case lots of uncorrupted people were left),


Nope....they were all corrupted. We can see the pattern repeated with Sodom and Gomorrah.....God said he would spare the cities if 10 righteous people were found there...and God sent angels to warn Lot, his wife, and two children. This indicates that God would not destroy or Kill any righteous people. So it is safe to conclude all the people that perished in the flood were happy to perish....just like suicide bombers are happy to perish....and if you tried to stop them...they would not like you very much...right?

So, don't feel sorry for people that got destroyed and were sent to hell, because if they went to heaven they would hate it there. Trust me, the unregenerate corrupt atheist enjoys hell much more than he would enjoy heaven...for if an unprepared soul entered heaven, it would surely think it was in Hell.



still had a chance at savior if they trusted in Moses?


Huh? Moses? Have you jumped to another story or do you mean Noah?



Would you hop aboard if some dude started shouting to the world there's going to be a flood?


Yes. In fact what is being played out right now on earth is the same scenario. For 2000 years the message of redemption and salvation by grace through faith in Christ out Lord has been going out. We have been warned about the coming end of mankind's governing on earth and the coming Kingdom of Christ being established. I heard the message and hopped on board....and now await for the coming King.



Would 10% of the world even hear his warning?


As I said, if anyone had humbled themselves, repented, and been found righteous God would have spared them from the flood.

Even after the rapture, people will be given another chance to repent....but it will be 7 years of hell on earth for them....but remember, there is no suffering when one enters eternity to be with God.



Is it right to allow these people to die because they thought this guy was an obvious nut case?


I think we can safely assume there was a lot more going on than what we are made aware of. Imagine the most horrific world filled with murders, cannibalism, blood lust, human sacrifice, with the stench of rotting flesh and all kids of disease and you might start to get a picture of the wickedness that filled the earth.



EDIT: And have you ever thought about the illogicality with a world flood? I mean...you'd either have to sink the land...or poor more water into our atmosphere...


What if the earth had a shell of frozen water above the upper atmosphere?
What if that shell shielded the inhabitants from ultraviolet rays and caused a double atmospheric pressure? Do you think you might live longer?

What if that shell was clear but at some times during the day the land mass of the earth was reflected up onto it so people could see it? Do you think people could have made accurate maps by looking up and seeing the reflection above?

What that shell was shattered and all that ice came down as rain?
What if the earth in Noah's time had no mountains...just rolling hills and valleys with a few rivers, ponds, lakes, and streams.

Did you know that the scientists in Noah's day thought he was crazy because he declared water would fall from the sky?
Did you know they though he was crazy because it had never rained upon the earth?

So all this water falls to earth, and the weight of all this water settling in low areas where the crust of the earth is weakest begins to sink, and in sinking forces the surrounding land masses to uplift...do ya think ya might get some mountains forming in a lot of coastal areas?

Do ya think that shell might have kept a nice even temperature around the entire planet, so that only light breezes were felt instead of the winds we get today....and do ya think that when this shell collapsed that maybe the earth's temps became uneven...causing the ice age, the massive amounts of sediment from the flood created the geologic column, carved the Grand Canion, caused the fossil record, and generally altered the entire face of the earth...making dating methods inacurate?

Hmmmm? But I regressed....sorry.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by ImplausibleDeniability
 


I prefer to use the mind God gave me to evaluate the Bible and when I run into difficulty I use my mind to research what other devout Christian scholars have learned over the past 2000 years.

To be an expert on the bible takes years and years of study, and that study involves learning from those people in the past who also studied and learned from other generations of scholars.

Having read the writings of many scholars, I can say without a doubt that you are no expert on God or the Bible.

I'm not saying I am either....but I prefer to look to those who have traveled the road before me for directions...rather than look like a fool.



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by John Matrix

I prefer to use the mind God gave me to evaluate the Bible and when I run into difficulty I use my mind to research what other devout Christian scholars have learned over the past 2000 years.


Amen to that!




To be an expert on the bible takes years and years of study, and that study involves learning from those people in the past who also studied and learned from other generations of scholars.

Having read the writings of many scholars, I can say without a doubt that you are no expert on God or the Bible.


LOL I never claimed to be. But then until I see the list of scholars you're stacking me up against I'm not going to claim not to know more than 'they' do.


Also, in doing a little light reading about the Cathar heresy over lunch today, I found this quote that I think has relevance to this thread:

Link: en.wikipedia.org...

Quote:

The God found in the Old Testament had nothing to do with the God of Love known to Cathars.

The Old Testament God had created the world as a prison, and demanded from the "prisoners" fearful obedience and worship. This false god was in reality — claimed the Cathari — a blind usurper who under the most false pretexts, tormented and murdered those whom he called, all too possessively, "his children". The false god was, by the Cathari, called Rex Mundi, or The King of the World.

This exegesis upon the Old Testament was not unique to the Cathars: it echoes views found in earlier Gnostic movements and foreshadows later critical voices. The dogma of the Trinity and the sacrament of the Eucharist, among others, were rejected as abominations. Belief in metempsychosis, or the transmigration of souls, resulted in the rejection of Hell and Purgatory, which were and are dogmas of the Catholic faith.

For the Cathars, this world was the only hell — there was nothing to fear after death, save perhaps rebirth.


I'm not asking anyone to agree with this, just putting it out there as a data point in the conversation.

Yours truly,

No Expert on God or the Bible



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Neo Christian Mystic
 


Please define a mystic for me, and I might consider answering your questions.




posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ImplausibleDeniability
 


Oioi to Rex Mundi and the Cathars. However, to claim they were in oposition to the eucharist in general is false. To the organised eucharist of the Catholic Church maybe, but not in general. The Kathars were reknown for their healing and sacred bread which people stuck away if they got it until the day they died, when they would eat it while drinking the "water" (better wine) or "wine" from the mouth of the "descendants of Christ", the Cathars who served as soulsearchers for thier believers in the last minutes...



posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by John Matrix
 


I did ask you a question @ the last post of page 6 and the first on page 7. Could you please answer those.

Thank you.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join