It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Satan and Science, His Creation to Mislead

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 10:54 AM

1) Does knowledge and use of the sciences serve the Devil?


2) Is it true that the more technological and "advanced" a society becomes the more likely they will turn from God to serve the other?


3) Has science and technology killed more people than any other single thing?

Not science per se, but human nature.

The sciences breed a God like syndrome in Man, we think we understand everything and control all, no need for God. Who does that serve? The desire for more is now an unquenchable thirst that cannot be quenched without the latest and greatest ipod or flat screen TV. Having enough is no longer enough so all our resources go to propping up our ego and "social status" rather than serving others. You have last years ipod, not good enough.... Don't feed the multitudes, buy a new ipod so you can keep up with the technological status quo.

People have the freedom to do what they want with their hard earned money. They worked hard for it, so buying the latest won't make one an evil person. We can't just generalize and judge people like that without asking their motives.

1) Science has built unimaginable killing technology from the gun to weaponized viruses.
2) How many people have been killed through modern transportation.
3) How many have died because of technology grown cancers.
4) How many animals have gone extinct in the name of progress.
5) How often do you push things of God's away to watch TV or sit on the computer?
6) Science is killing our planet (God's beautiful creation) with pollution.

To answer that:

1. It's human nature.
2. It's accident.
3. It's genetic and level of exposure.
4. How many animals have gone extinct due to the wrath of nature? Hint: Dinosaurs
5. There is always a time for everything. A time to have fun, a time to gather around, a time to be serious, and a time to pray. We pray for thanks giving before we eat our breakfast, lunch, or dinner. Everything must be in balance. Time management is all that is needed. However, we can't really control people in what they want to do with their time.
6. Volcanic eruptions (nature's biggest polluter), earthquakes, tsunamis, flooding, etc. have greater damage than all of the modern technology combined.

How many people has science fed? It could feed all but enough is not enough for us.

How many pests and droughts has nature brought about to damage crops, plantations, fruits, vegetables, corns, wheat, etc? Without science to prevent pests from destroying agriculture, everyone will go hungry.

If only everything is free, everyone will no longer be hungry. However, to deliver food, we need fuel. Fuel costs money and food has an expiration date so you need to store them is some refrigeration facility. Electricity cost money. It's easier said that done. If only things were so simple, every thing would be possible. But, that is not reality.

Bottom line is that Science is not of God and it serves the other. It makes humans believe in their own divinity and separates us from our source....from all that is good.

That is not true.

It is the Devils conspiracy to set us on this path, a path that leads to one thing...the death of God's creation.

Death is everywhere. Didn't you notice? Everything has an expiry date.

What do you think....should I see a Doctor?

No. You should ought to stop being so paranoid. Relax and enjoy life.

[edit on 9/4/2010 by kinglizard]

Mod edit: to clarify on OP's request

[edit on 5 Sep 2010 by Hellmutt]

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 12:06 PM
reply to post by kinglizard

Well it'a for sure man left to his own devices will bring things to oblivion. The science man uses could be guided by the right leadership but man has chosen the wrong one for the most part. The climax of time is at hand. Man was not to die in the beginning and time wasn't an element but time began when the first couple were led astray to disobey. They had then chosen a new master to lead them in a science that had to come about because they now where cast out of the Paradise Garden of the right science. Man needs to return to the right leader for sure and man it is getting late in the last day so to speak. Time is a temporary for this science to show just to how awful and deep a depths it can go and then it will be finished. No all science is not bad, but the good is being overtaken by the bad.

The truth will iron out the wrinkles.


posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 12:16 PM
Just gonna throw this out there, didnt read the prior 12 pages. But I believe it was Pythagoras who said "In order for humans to co-exist and develop in all aspects, Philiosophy, Science, and Religion would have to advance simultaneously without ever exceeding one another".

Pretty sure I butchered the quote, but regardless, thats complete opposite of what has happened in our world. Philiosophy is there to bridge the gap between Science and Religion which happens to be a big gap in this case... And I dont just mean our society in general. I mean everyone. Or else you end up with people making threads kinda like this one... That sounded harsh, no disrespect, threads like this make a person think and in my case wonder.. 'what if'

S & F!

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 02:16 PM
Yeah, definitely see a doctor. Aha! That's one of the few times I saw that spelled correctly, don't you agree ATSers!!!

Dude, if science were for maniacs and evil doers, then engineers and scientists should stop making our lives more comfortable and lawyers and sales people should go overtime. That's probably a semi-private joke, or a professional joke, but let the reader understand. Go ahead and entrust your "science" backto shamans and wizards and warlocksand priests.

You deserve it. Or go see the doc.

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 02:21 PM

Originally posted by BoehringerIngelheim

Death is everywhere. Didn't you notice? Everything has an expiry date.

What do you think....should I see a Doctor?

No. You should ought to stop being so paranoid. Relax and enjoy life

-- WHOAH! There you go! Just stop being paranoid. Relax.

I agree. Seek equilibrium. Peace.

edit on 8-9-2010 by headb because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:24 PM
reply to post by kinglizard

Or God gave people teh ability to develope these medical devices so that they can save people. Point and click at a human who will come up with next imaging technology.

And if scientists were happy with the current knowledge set, science would never move forward. It is curiousity about needs and discoveries that drive science in the first place. I have never met a complacent scientist. Scientists, are by nature, a curious and searching species...

And the devil has nothing to do with it. With any set of information, you can do what you will with it.

You can split an atom and make a bomb, or you can split an atom and make an energy source. Science just is, the good and bad come from the people.

And exactly why is wanting the latest ipod..evil?

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 03:37 PM
i am sorry but i realy dont like where this is heading tech satans creation
so god expects US to be dirt rolling pigs no way of defending ourselves or anything...i think he needs a docter NOW

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 04:15 PM
reply to post by kinglizard

I agree with you. Science and tech isn't bad but humans often use it for evil over time. I believe that if we concentrated on our 6th sense more that we could levitate, speak telepathically, visit different dimensions by just using our brains and soul. That is the problem with tech and science it keeps us distracted from how powerful our own minds are. Isn't it said that we don't even use half of our total brain power? Just think what we could do. Technology is the easy way out in to nothingness

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 05:09 PM
How many people have been saved by science? It has done wonderful things, but I believe anything can be used for evil. Of coarse Satan is distracting us with sex on TV and new video games *yes I pre-ordered Playstation Move* but what happens when church is used for evil? When a pastor turns against truth and leads his flock astray? I believe that is the bigger evil and it probably happens in churches across the world.

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 05:12 PM
Congratulations OP, you made it to the number 1 spot in my weekly "dumbest posts of the week" ranking list

Evangelists and their apprehension against science is laughable. Are you seriously claiming knowledge is a bad thing and you'd prefer for us to stay ignorant and dumb...and believing in god...rather than learning about how things really work? That's the dumbest statement I heard in a long time, especially on a site with a "deny ignorance" mantra

If you were right, we'd still believe the earth is flat, meteorites are a sign of god, wouldn't have medicine, couldn't fly planes, ...

Thanks for the laugh though
(although the number of stars you got for posting this is kinda worrying)

And it's not as if your alternative (religion) has been responsible for many good things in history...

edit on 8-9-2010 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 07:05 PM
reply to post by kinglizard

Originally posted by kinglizard
What if that hammer was an object of great desire, even a status symbol. They cost several hundreds of dollars and their beauty and the social status that they lend to their owner encourages them to buy a new one every 6 months as they discard the old. It's a perpetual never ending cycle of waste and unrealistic desire for this object. Who does the object serve? From a Christian viewpoint if possible.

KL, why do we have a graduation of forms in the geologic strata, please answer from a purely scientific perspective. There's no way I can answer from a Christian viewpoint and be honest. And honestly the Christian viewpoint here would be that the man serves the hammer...but that's entirely wrong. Let me explain.

The object doesn't serve anything and nobody serves the hammer. The hammer is still just a hammer. The hammer can be used, it can be bought or not. The problem here lies entirely in sociology and psychology.

But your entire analogy collapses, as science isn't a status symbol at all, you cannot buy it, and it is an abstract concept rather than a physical object.

Maybe one simple 12 dollar steel hammer would due for most of your life time.

All the money wasted could have been used for better purposes. No doubt that's a choice for the individual to make but the influence of the "object of great desire" is a difficult thing to ignore.

Again your 'object of desire' thing fails as science isn't an object and doesn't come in varieties to choose from, it's a methodology.

Now, if you're implying what I think you're implying, you're entirely wrong and I would have to actively practice patience and courtesy to refrain from using insults.

I believe there's no way to spend money better than on science.
Let's take a look at one simple thing: every disease that has ever been cured in human history has been cured by science and science alone.
That alone makes it a worthwhile expenditure.

Thanks to science and science alone life expectancy in the United States has double in the last 150 years. 150 years ago the average white male lived to about the age of 38, today he can expect to live to about the age of 76.
That's thanks to: medicine, waste management, water treatment, and advances in farming technology.
All products of science.
Sure, science has also created the atomic bomb, a weapon that was used twice. In those two times it killed no more than 500,000 people. That's a lot of people, but compared to the number of people science has saved? That's not so much. Hundreds of millions of lives have been saved by things as simple as the development of germ theory or the creation of penicillin (and other antibiotics). There's even just waste management. I can't even imagine how many people would die in the next 10 years in the west without proper waste management.

Then there are the achievements of science that are purely enlightening to the human mind. Like photography, which first allowed us to view something that actually exists but we are not physically present to witness. Though painting had tried to do that before, the photograph was the culmination of that idea, except that it wasn't. Film, and later video, would allow us to witness events as they actually happened anywhere in the world. This allowed a simple farmer in rural Kansas to see the sprawling metropolis of Tokyo, enriching his life to the possibilities of the world. This can be extended to modern telecommunications, where we can get an even better perspective on life in Tokyo by communicating with a resident living in Tokyo instantly, right after seeing the video on the internet, and ask him questions about it.

I'm quite sure we should be simply investing more in science, it's done enough to prove its worth to the world.
More than can be said for religion.

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 07:15 PM

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
But your entire analogy collapses, as science isn't a status symbol at all, you cannot buy it, and it is an abstract concept rather than a physical object.

Did you read the opening post?

Science is the thing that gives us is destroying the planet and encouraging an enough is never enough attitude. That doesn't serve God IMO.

Anyway thanks for sharing your thoughts here.

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 07:31 PM
reply to post by kinglizard

Except that I already pointed out that science isn't destroying the Earth, people are. We could destroy the Earth all sorts of ways without advanced technology. Example: anywhere.

We deforested quite alright without modern technology, the island of Malta is a great example of that.
We hunted things to extinction without it as well, killed off all the mammoths with spears, bows, and fire.

Technically some level of technology was used, but technology and modern humanity are best friends. We picked up a stone to open a nut of some sort and realized "Wow, this is really handy, I'll hold on to it to use it again"
And then it just marched on.

Now, as for the consumer society, it isn't a matter of technology, it's a matter of comfort. We have a comfortable lifestyle, we don't have to worry about starving to death if the harvest isn't that great this year. We don't have to worry about a tiger jumping through our window and killing us either. So we need to fill our time. It's a matter of personal choice that lets people go to technology for an outlet, just like we are going right now. I'm using my moderately priced laptop to discuss a philosophical issue with someone who (I'm assuming here) is thousands of miles away from me.

As for serving your deity, that's another issue entirely. If your deity would be served better by allowing hundreds of millions of innocents to die of starvation, malnutrition, disease, and squalor....well, I'd prefer to serve the other guy in that case.

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 07:35 PM

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Except that I already pointed out that science isn't destroying the Earth, people are. We could destroy the Earth all sorts of ways without advanced technology. Example: anywhere.

The level of technology that we see today and on the horizon is like giving a baby a loaded 357 magnum, pulling back the hammer and saying "it's your choice to use this object as you wish, make the right choice young one". From my POV I know who would love to place that gun in the babies hand and it's not God.

No doubt people are the ones who choose how to use a technology but like I said above.....

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 07:50 PM

Originally posted by kinglizard

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Except that I already pointed out that science isn't destroying the Earth, people are. We could destroy the Earth all sorts of ways without advanced technology. Example: anywhere.

The level of technology that we see today and on the horizon is like giving a baby a loaded 357 magnum, pulling back the hammer and saying "it's your choice to use this object as you wish, make the right choice young one".

Ok, you have a conclusion, but you have absolutely no way of backing that conclusion up with a logical argument. I don't see how giving a baby a loaded gun (Why would you need to pull back the hammer? Pulling back the hammer does nothing on a modern gun except make an intimidating noise for action movies.) is similar to humanity getting modern technology.

The primary point that falls apart is that modern technology has advanced gradually over a process of a few hundred years (let's just take the Renaissance as a starting point arbitrarily, though science does predate that), and everything that is scientific is of our own making. The baby isn't making the gun in your description, nor does it have any prior knowledge of it. We have prior knowledge and a seemingly unlimited capacity for reason (though it is limited, we've yet to hit a point where reason isn't sufficient), we can use our technology responsibly, like in all those ways I mention that save lives.

There's also the fact that (as I've demonstrated) science is almost entirely non-destructive unless applied to do so. A gun has one setting: shoot things.

So the baby has two sets of choices:
1: Shoot or not shoot.
2: What to shoot.

With science we have a series of questions like this:
1: What don't I understand today?
2: How can I better understand it?
3: How can I apply this understanding to the lives of people?
and then there's a causal chain that involves many, many people

From my POV I know who would love to place that gun in the babies hand and it's not God.

I see you've dismantled that crude straw man quite easily, but I'm talking about science, which isn't a weapon, and humans, which aren't ignorant babies.

No doubt people are the ones who choose how to use a technology but like I said above.....

Like you said above is actually failing to address 90% (ok, slightly less, it's 89.31%) of the post I just made and 100% of the post preceding it.

Could you please actually respond to my arguments rather than just making statements at me and coming up with ridiculously unrelated scenarios for me to demolish?

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 08:01 PM
Ignorance, racism and religious fervor have killed more people than science.

Think of the Crusades, think of the Moors, think of the Nazis and the Japanese Empire. Hell, think of Jesus and the persecution of the early Christians.

Lucifer literally means "light-bearer" who, much like Prometheus was condemned by a jealous god for bringing fire to humans as he championed human-kind, Lucifer was cast out of heaven for bringing knowledge to humanity.

What kind of sick God would punish the acquisition of knowledge by beings to whom he gave the ability to reason and the thirst for knowledge in the first place?

Churchhill said "The victors write the histories" or some such, so I think Lucifer gets a bad rap from a God that is clearly schizophrenic if you note the difference in tone between the Old Testament and the New Testament.

Oh, and God's been doing such a bang-up job lately hasn't he?

posted on Sep, 8 2010 @ 08:45 PM
Since we're talking about opinions here's mine.
God is all science.
The science known, and the science unknown.
There is so much science going on in the entire universe at any given moment that IF the science ceased,
so would everything cease.
It is the application and intent of the science being used that comes into question, and from our very very very limited understanding of all science, we as humans allow the known science to be used to do more damage than good.
This is not the devil, this is not god.
This is humans with access and control making terrible selfish choices.
I understand your desire to see good done, to see science used to heal, grow, cure, help, feed.
Unfortunately not until a business model and profit generation line is created will that way of life ever exist.
It's people my friend, sick twisted messed up people and their choices.
It's all choices.
Always has been always will be.


edit on 8-9-2010 by HappilyEverAfter because: spelling correction

posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 01:32 AM
Surely if you believe in "god" and the things the bible says, then you would agree with the assumption that god was the absolute beginning of all things. Nothing before him, nothing without his doing. And surely you would agree with the assumption that he is aware of everything that happens before it ever happens.
If this is accurate to your understanding, then it would be plausible to say that god knew: That satan would turn against him. That eve would eat from the tree. That her children would be imperfect. That they would murder, rape and pillage each other to no end. That disease would spread uncontrollably. That we would wage war amongst ourselves. That we would build the Nuclear bomb. And that lots of people would hate him for allowing this all to happen.
Ill humor you and say that god and satan do exist. If the almighty god who promises peace and happiness in perfect world cannot deliver, but the lowly satan will and can dish out the worst possible punishments when he sees fit, then when the time comes for me to be judged, Ill hope satan makes me the general of his army.

posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 02:17 AM

Originally posted by kinglizard
Please, I'm interested in conversation not insults and off topic posts.

Well then try to understand that's exactly what this topic is to some of us: an insult to intelligence.

Your OP makes it seem that Satan (a fictional character) is responsible for science, which kills a lot of people (according to your OP)

What about the parts of science which made it possible for you to post such a thread on an internetboard, or modern medicine for example? Is that Satan's work aswell?..

Extreme Religion (that's what this is ihmo) is trying so hard to make "science look bad", but all the failed attempts are ridiculous and quite frankly really dumb.

posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 02:46 AM
Science and materialism are two different things. Without science we might have never gotten out of the caves. Science does not kill anyone because it is not a living being, it has no desire or will, no intentions. Therefor it can not be good or evil. It is the scientists who bare the burden of morality. Also, do you not realize how many innocent people have been killed in the name of religion? Probably way more than science has ever killed.

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in