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.

 

A Simple Question to Christians

page: 4
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by bogomil
 




Assumed christian 'absolute': God exists.


I know you're not new here so what's your excuse for being ignorant to the TOS for this forum?

Unless specifically addressed in the theme or OP of the thread it's assumed that God exists here.


Some of the topics in this forum will most certainly deal with the existence of God. Does God really exist? While this is a worthwhile topic many members wish to move past this introductory theme, past Religion 101, and would like to dive into deeper topic of religion and faith. Are Christians required to keep all of the 10 Commandments including the Sabbath day? Are the teachings of Mohammed peaceful, a beneficial for people today? Do Mormons really believe in polygamy? Do all Buddhist monks have flashbacks before battle? We can't begin to truly discuss these topics if we're constantly arguing about if God is real or not...

If you have questions that deal with the existence of God or want to ask if Mohammed actually was a real person or a myth, then please start a new discussion with a meaningful, appropriate title and you may then dominate a new discussion with this theme in mind. Please do not interject into deeper religious topics the question of the reality of a higher being. Unless stated in the topic, we are assuming in this forum that we've moved on past that point. Imagine discussing algebra while someone keeps interjecting that they still don’t believe in addition. The very reason that classes such as these have prerequisites is so new ground can be covered in the subject.


ALL MEMBERS READ - Moving Past Religion 101 and Staying on Topic





As the result of your circle-argumentatory comment in your answer to DaveakaRNG: "Who are you to judge God?", I eventually arrived at some options in a recent post, which disputed the validity of this postulate of yours.

Amongst these options I mentioned, is the one you refer to here. Do you suggest, that I should have left that one out to satisfy your interpretation of forum-guidelines?

In that case, WHY should I have left it out (as it clearly IS an option, though not one I have shown any special interest in following up). And why do you single it out from my whole post, which overall purpose was to state, that we DO have the possibility of 'judging 'god' '.

The option of 'Judging 'god' ' is directly implied in the OP, and the three other background-options of 'judging 'god' ' I mentioned in this my former post are possible interpretations of the bible (including the character Jahveh) giving a completely different outlook of the intrinsic moral values of the bible and its 'god' than YOUR subjective interpretation does.

So with the present impossibility of verifying the existence/non-existence of trans-mundane existence and its specific nature in mind, but operating with the assumption that any such could exist, there are still several christian-critical positions (some of them from subsets of the christianities disputing other christian subsets):

A/ There could be existence 'beyond' the 'god' of the bible, with possible ulterior moral values (an option e.g. presented in some jewish traditions functioning as a 'canvass' for OT).

B/ There could be several parallel trans-mundane (but not ultimate) deities or situations, each one with its/his/her competing moral value systems.

At the mundane level of interpretation of any trans-mundane existence:

1/ That the 'god' of the bible in reality is the flying spaghetti monster, which has been misrepresented as Jahveh (this example is not to be taken literally, but as a demonstration of the problems of interpretation, eventually a subjective/objective epistemological problem).

2/ That staying with just a strict, but subjective, bible-adherence can lead to basic attitudes ranging from utter 'free will' to the 'slave'-position (in a broader 'good/bad' context). Apparantly the bible is so imprecise and self-contradicting, that you can 'conclude' your way to various (incompatible) positions, based on the many unsolved questions associated with bible-intepretation without any STANDARD objective methodology involved (I'm ofcourse here excluding the many christian attempts of producing their own version of 'science' and 'logic', which have little to do with authentic science/logic).



Now, as a non-christian, I can't legitimately answer the question addressed directly to christians on this thread, but based on the following two quotes, I can relate to the situation around the question.

Citing from the forum-recommendations presented in your recent post:

Quote: ["If you have questions that deal with the existence of God or want to ask if Mohammed actually was a real person or a myth, then please start a new discussion with a meaningful, appropriate title and you may then dominate a new discussion with this theme in mind"]

which by the word "dominate" gives an OP-author certain 'ringmaster' rights

And referring to the OP-author's recent post:

Quote: ["1. Why on God's side, since Satan is clearly the nicer guy in the Bible?"]

where the "why" (which I understand as "how do you arrive at whatever answer you have") and "Satan clearly presented in the bible" are forum topics open for all, as they a/ is a scenario everybody can relate to and b/ also is a question of the methodology used (=why).

(All this my circumstantial and convoluted nitpicking could have been avoided, if you hadn't introduced your interest in semantics gymnastics and formal forum-rules as tactical maneuvers).

As you know from former contact with me, I'm rather annoyingly insistent on the point of the inseparability of specific perspective and its outcoming answers (i.e. the use of a systematic methodology and its subjective/objective basis)...

...and together with my own understanding of the bible (on the present topic) it leads me to this:

The bible is an expression of a conflict between two existential principles (possibly personificated through various characters). These two principles (and/or their representatives) are described as ultimate 'good'/'evil'. Depending on personal mindset/perspective/methodology 'sides' are chosen (both in- and outside the christianities) and because of the inconsistency of the bible it's IMO a safe assumption to make, that an overwhelming majority of all these 'sides' are SUBJECTIVE FAITHS. No less, no more.

There's nothing wrong with subjective faiths per se, as long as they are presented as such. But a problem arises, when they are presented as exclusive 'absolutes', which pushed on mankind changes the situation from a local 'academic' dispute amongst 'specialists', to a subject of general interest for all mankind.

And the Satan/'god' situation propagandistically presented in the bible is certainly such a situation of general interest for all mankind, where subjective faiths interpretations are worthless in a broader context. As the forum-rule in your post also said:

Quote: ["While this is a worthwhile topic many members wish to move past this introductory theme, past Religion 101, and would like to dive into deeper topic of religion and faith"]

So my suggestion is, that you also move past this point of endless presentations of your own subjective FAITH as an 'absolute', as this has been chewed over so many times as to terminal boredom always concluding with: "But this is my faith" and get to the point of a deeper understanding of faith and religion, beginning with understanding the need of a common communication-platform.

PS I may add, that I according to this (alas) longwinded post, won't respond to any scholastic 'analysis' of single words or sentences picked out of context.




posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You wrote:

["2. Satan can't be "killed". He is a Spirit being. And if you know anything about Einstein's general theory of relativity time only affects things subjected to mass and gravity, therefore anything that's not affected by that is eternal. Your spirit is eternal as well."]

Seen from a perspective of standard (real) science, this misuse of Einstein's theory is pure bosh. But it's a good example of the request in my last post of finding a common communication basis.

Hijacking and twisting science to your own purposes is NOT such a communication basis. If you wish to use 'science', present your own version with its systematic methodology, its procedures, its control mechanisms and to what extent it has been peer-verified.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by graphuto
I want to see scripture portraying Satan as the "nicer guy" in the Bible.

Well how about you read the book then? The overall message is:

God = genocide committing malicious being filled with rage

Satan = never does anything evil, unless specifically instructed by God to do so
edit on 19-4-2011 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 12:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Satan can't be "killed". He is a Spirit being.

Where in the Bible does it say this?



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 


Where in the bible does it say:

God = genocide committing malicious being filled with rage

Satan = never does anything evil, unless specifically instructed by God to do so



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by graphuto
I want to see scripture portraying Satan as the "nicer guy" in the Bible.

Well how about you read the book then? The overall message is:

God = genocide committing malicious being filled with rage

Satan = never does anything evil, unless specifically instructed by God to do so
edit on 19-4-2011 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)


No. The overall message is that the world is run by Satan and there is more to our lives than this tiny amount of time we have spent on this earth, and in order to be a part of that "more" we should follow God's teachings.

Like I said, show me just 1 single verse that backs up your claim, because I can go on and on to support mine.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 


These are valid points. God in the Old Testament seems easily offended and smiteful.

You seem to have read the Old Testament, and correct me if I am wrong. In addition, have you also read the New Testament seeing as how it is it's compatriot?



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by graphuto
 


You wrote:

["No. The overall message is that the world is run by Satan and there is more to our lives than this tiny amount of time we have spent on this earth, and in order to be a part of that "more" we should follow God's teachings."]

Before you continue, it would be of value, if you clarified your own position on who Satan is, where he came (originated) from, what his function is, what authority he has and who (possibly) has given him this authority.

As often is the case amongst the many christianities, there is here as there is elsewhere on other subjects, a lot of disagreement. Some of it even based on an apparent ignorance of the bible itself.



posted on Apr, 19 2011 @ 07:19 PM
link   
I don't need to provide my view of what I think these things are/mean. I'm not the one that started a thread making a ridiculous claim without citing any scripture.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by opnureyes

Originally posted by boondock-saint
lol
it seems we have one or more of these threads daily
around ATS. This is nothing more than blasphemy
of God. Just another niche trying to siphon Christians
of their faith. Not me, I ain't biting.


I believe the thread, if im not mistaking, it called called 'a simple question to christians'. Seems fair enough right?
Indeed there are people on this forum that have strong feelings against popular religion, but I believe a lot are of good nature as well. Christianity, being as huge as its gotten up to today, should be researched and questioned, and debated.
We are all adults here, well most of us.
Talking up christianity is like saying donky kong is the best video game ever..
Your turn



Nor am I biting. You think a question regarding someones faith or their religion is a SIMPLE QUESTION? That is a misnomer. A simple question is, what are you having for lunch? Sum up your family history, traditions, hopes, fears and core beliefs to tell the world is not a simple question. It is a difficult and ultimately UNANSWERABLE question since "religious" people can only offer their belief not facts. People can claim religion is responsible for the majority of differences between us and is the cause of many wars. Even this is a fallacy since most wars are fought over the land and the property belonging to the people regardless of their religion. Religion itself is not a crime and being prevented from practicing yours is why this United States was started in the first place. Religious persecution.
No one is disparaging good natured people or those with strong feelings against religion.
There should not be a problem with religious people reminding other religious people this may be a veiled attempt to discredit and attack their core beliefs. Reminding other religious people they are not alone. What is that to you? If you are against religion start a thread on it and describe why you think it is failing it's people. Otherwise to take sideways pot shots at individuals expressing their beliefs is less than genuine and a cowards way to fight. Your turn.




posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by rhinoceros
 


(i am not a believer in god anymore my sisters and mother are though) My depection of adam and eve was that god realised he created two more beings like himself, Yet he could not cut out the most needed thing for survival; Knowllage, the apple was put on the earth to make the earth knowlageable to take care of the humans and keep them in order by EG, Noahs Flood and such things that god had to do himself because humans took the knowlage to survive on there own and grow in Intelect and Wisdom till we all were Gods and that is why anyone who dose not folow his morals should be Punished. I take 1/2 of this from Medieval Christianity (i know most of it is dead now) but it was a repression of alchemy witch as we learned is what makes medicine, he was jealous that we found a way to keep ourselves from going to him and avoiding the Plauges and Diseases that he placed to punish us.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by graphuto
 


You wrote:

["I don't need to provide my view of what I think these things are/mean."]

If you by 'need' mean something compulsary, I ofcourse agree with you. Free speech is an immensely important part of egalitarian, secular, liberal democracy and there are fortunately not any formal obligations connected with presenting opinions publicly, as there are/have been in nazi-germany, sovjet or the various theocracies in abrahamic religions' political careers.

If you by 'need' mean something being a part of validating positions, I disagree with you. Mankind's strongest talent as a species is (apart from opposed thumbs) our ability to transmit accumulated knowledge. Sitting by a computer as you do now, you have accepted and become a part of the 'information-society', and it is hypocrasy to wash your hands of it (you still have the option to become part of an Amish-like subculture as an alternative).

Ofcourse "providing views" is still voluntary, but by joining a debate forum with a tradition of strong questioning attitudes, you will one way or another be exposed to comments on what you write or DO NOT write. Are you only here to preach?

Quote: ["I'm not the one that started a thread making a ridiculous claim without citing any scripture."]

What do you exactly mean by "without citing any scripture". Do you mean cherry-picking specific bible-verses? Or rather the more reasonable way of using an overall picture, which both you and the OP-author use?

Or do you use circle-argumentation and claim that the bible is the outmost 'authority' on anything (the bible is true, because it says it's true). I believe, that the OP-author have other reference-points apart from the bible itself; as I have.

So are you ONLY part of a debate, resting on the bible as THE exclusive truth? In that case I will use the same 'bad language' as you (I usually try to avoid that) and return the 'ridiculous' to you.

If you on the other hand find the content of OP to 'simplistic', I'll have to remind you, that it's me you're communicating with now, not the OP-author, and I can be excessively un-simplistic, as you probably have noticed.

The Satan mentioned in the bible, and having his parallels of 'bad guys' in other religions can't be considered in any responsible way, before it's clarified, what exactly we're talking about. The level of argumentation you're suggesting is: Me all white..everything else indiscriminately black.



edit on 20-4-2011 by bogomil because: spelling



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 


You wrote:

["You think a question regarding someones faith or their religion is a SIMPLE QUESTION?"]

Basically I'll agree with you. At the end of the day, there's nothing 'simple' about religion or theology. But on the other hand a lot of religionists manifest as extremely simple. To the point of just repeating spoon-fed doctrines, they never have met in the original form or even really understand.

Had the OP-author chosen to be complex, he would have recieved criticism for that also (I talk from personal experience).

Quote: ["It is a difficult and ultimately UNANSWERABLE question since "religious" people can only offer their belief not facts."]

It happens app. once every month, that a christian says this. And I can only applaud, because this is IMO true. The average non-missionary christian (or other religionist) knows this, and just want to be able to have/perform his/her religion on a private or between-consenting-adults basis without interference.

The problems start, when evangelizing individuals, with claims of exclusivity, start missioning. VERY often with pseudo-facts as arguments. Are you surprised, that this meets with indignated opposition?

Quote: [" People can claim religion is responsible for the majority of differences between us and is the cause of many wars."]

It is not fair to single out religion. ALL extremist ideology can create conflicts, and opposing extremists even blame each other and make inflamed claims of: "They started it", as an excuse. Seen from an overall view in mankind, the bad guys are everything from militant vegans and fascist 'greeners' to Stalinists and ' 'god's soldiers'.

Quote: ["Religion itself is not a crime and being prevented from practicing yours is why this United States was started in the first place."]

My comment: Same as above.

If you want a compatriot for constitutional rights, I'm your man. But it must be emphasized, that constitutional rights do NOT allow extra-parliamentory maneuvers in the form of elitist claims.

Quote: [" There should not be a problem with religious people reminding other religious people this may be a veiled attempt to discredit and attack their core beliefs."]

The 'Satan-scare' tactics have been and is still used in various contexts. There's nothing unreasonable in taking a very critical look at it. From both the perspective of its impact on society and from a more detached academical perspective.

Quote: ["Reminding other religious people they are not alone. What is that to you?"]

Religionists wanting a friendly chit-chat without opposition shouldn't choose ATS then. There are more censored sites elsewhere, where religion-criticism isn't accepted.

To be honest; my personal opinion is, that the religionists joining ATS consist to a high degree of quibblers and/or proselyters. I have no sympathy at all for whiners with persecution-complexes or -tactics.

Quote: ["If you are against religion start a thread on it and describe why you think it is failing it's people."]

IMO opinion this is precisely what's been done on this thread.

Quote: ["Otherwise to take sideways pot shots at individuals expressing their beliefs is less than genuine and a cowards way to fight."]

I'm offering you the possibility of taking a 'round' or two with me. Whatever my faults are, I do my best to fight with true colours and I'm on principle against lying.

So shall we return to Satan, 'god' and moral values?



edit on 20-4-2011 by bogomil because: grammar



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Back to the OP, he or someone needs to provide scripture citing Satan as the good guy.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by graphuto
Back to the OP, he or someone needs to provide scripture citing Satan as the good guy.


Why?

I have already asked you, if the bible is the only reference-point on this. You can e.g. read bible texts, and evaluate them from different sets of moral values.

Most of us non-believers do not accept the bible as an 'authority', and especially not in a situation where the bible is expected to justify or give credibility to itself. In standard logic this is considered rather stupid, so don't expect people operating from a mainly science/logic basis to accept YOUR rules.

I have noticed this inability for evangelist christians to understand a rejection of the bible; it's almost as if you can't even concieve of such a possibility. Are there some mental filters at work, so deeply embedded in your psyches, that a non-believer mindset is something impossible?



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by bogomil

Smurfs



You should change your name to gargamel because christians are like smurfs to you.

Peace



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 11:51 PM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 


If someone, as an athiest, recognized the Bible as a moral authority, I would, if I were able to pick up my jaw, have to call hypocrite!

Regarding the original post, if we are going to take the Bible as an authority regarding Satan, he seems to oppose God in the scriptures. His role is more foggy in the Old Testament than in the New, but even Orthodox Jews recognize an angel of God's who seeks to turn His people away from Him.

As far as wanting to go to Hell to kill Satan... Well, if we're going to take scripture as a whole, meaning the entire content of the Bible, as being accurate, that would be idiotic. The Bible states when and how Satan would be defeated. So if you, completely believing the Bible, decided you wanted to kill Satan, and looked to the Bible to see how to do so, you would see it is only God who could end Satan's reign, and even then, it's not clear if Satan is "dead" as we understand dead.



posted on Apr, 20 2011 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by bogomil

Originally posted by graphuto
Back to the OP, he or someone needs to provide scripture citing Satan as the good guy.


Why?

I have already asked you, if the bible is the only reference-point on this. You can e.g. read bible texts, and evaluate them from different sets of moral values.

Most of us non-believers do not accept the bible as an 'authority', and especially not in a situation where the bible is expected to justify or give credibility to itself. In standard logic this is considered rather stupid, so don't expect people operating from a mainly science/logic basis to accept YOUR rules.

I have noticed this inability for evangelist christians to understand a rejection of the bible; it's almost as if you can't even concieve of such a possibility. Are there some mental filters at work, so deeply embedded in your psyches, that a non-believer mindset is something impossible?


Isn't the whole idea of what the OP talking about Satan and God not BIBLICAL in nature?
Or did you not read the OP's post?


Why are you on God's side?

According to the Bible Satan is not evil. In fact Satan doesn't say almost anything in the Bible. Satan certainly doesn't come off as hateful, as he never does anything really evil. So yeah, he tells Eve to eat the forbidden fruit, but it's not him who does the punishing. God on the other hand can't stand the slightest transgression. God is the one who is filled with rage. It is God who kicks his children out of the paradise, and then creates disease, suffering, death, toil, starvation and pain. It's God who punishes us, not Satan

The death toll in the Bible is God: millions, Satan: 11 (with god's explicit order)

Also, if after reading the above you're still on God's side, then why aren't you being a good Christian and doing everything in your power to end up in Hell, so that you might get a chance to kill Satan? If this isn't your aim, then you're not a true enemy of Satan


His whole post is regarding what the BIBLE says!
What other reference point are we to use when we're talking about the BIBLE!?
You're arguing for the sake of arguing.
edit on 21-4-2011 by graphuto because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Are there some mental filters at work, so deeply embedded in your psyches, that a non-believer mindset is something impossible?


Absolutely.



posted on Apr, 21 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by bogomil
reply to post by newcovenant
 


Quote: ["If you are against religion start a thread on it and describe why you think it is failing it's people."]

IMO opinion this is precisely what's been done on this thread.

I'm offering you the possibility of taking a 'round' or two with me.
So shall we return to Satan, 'god' and moral values?


I left that because you are right on that (and on many other things I might add - to your credit.)
But my friend, the poster boondocksaint gave a harmless statement that criticized no one, no religion no agnostic and no atheist yet you saw fit to disparage this as if he were trying actively to control your mind. There is a difference between proselytizing, which I despise as well, and simple heartfelt expression and yet you seem to slap at anything that moves.
I do not want to argue nor return to Satan God or moral values because I know very little about any of those, but face facts - the OPs thread here would not be much different if he began why are you people so stupid?

Also, if after reading the above you're still on God's side, then why aren't you being a good Christian and doing everything in your power to end up in Hell, so that you might get a chance to kill Satan? If this isn't your aim, then you're not a true enemy of Satan.

Mysterious subject matters/ Conspiracies in Religion - Of course this is a forum and so we should be able to have a back and forth conversations and examine ideas. Not criticize individual people.
The OP did not call for a flash mob of sharks to come and feed on the religious who respond to the dangling Christ. And if they start to swarm upon them why can't I lend a hand? I am not surprised evangelizing individuals meet with indignation and opposition. They should. This is not a place to recruit followers of anything but sense and sensibility. But as well people should respect each others freedom to believe or not as they wish.
I respect your decision not to believe in Christ. Even defend your choice to criticize someone who does, but wait until they are forcing doctrine on you or being oppressive or doing something to warrant the attack. Unprovoked springing on people who do not even fit the mold of spoonfed missionary or whacked out evangelist to me is not cool.
You should not make a kneejerk decision someone is NOT a good and decent person based simply on their religion or a slight expression of their religion. I see a great deal of that happening here as well. First get to know the person.
But that is just IMO.
And incidentally I did not know what IMO meant until you slipped it out up there, so it is certainly true, everyone can teach you something. You seem a good and decent person able to tell the difference between right and wrong so you should uplift others who need it. I don't think you should waste your time bothering people you feel do not have as pure and simple a philosophy as you. The difference is negligible. Go after those who are opposite and evil. Give them the benefit of your opinion. They are the ones that need it.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join