Got into a facebook discussion (clearly there's a problem already) with a Christian friend.I posted a link to an article about Satanists asking some Oklahoma state house to allow for one of their monuments to be displayed next to a monument of the ten commandments which is also there.What should have been a discussion about the separation of church and state and amendments and all that turned into a discussion about biblical ethics and the problem of evil and free will.
My attention span is rapidly depleting and I don't know where to go from here.Am I asking stupid questions,making stupid points?Am I just filling my arguments with non-sequiturs?Am I flat out fully retarded?
He's green,I'm red.
I don't understand Satanists. If they read the Bible to the point of acknowledging the existence of Satan, then how come they intentionally choose the losing side? To acknowledge Satan is to acknowledge God's creation of Satan, and therefore, they acknowledge the existence of Jesus Christ and the remission of sins. So one can conclude that the ultimate goal of a Satanist is to misguide people. Seems like a pretty shitty goal to me, which is enough of a reason to reject their proposal for a statue. At least whether you believe in Christianity or not, the ultimate goal of a Christian is salvation for all, not damnation for all.
It's as if someone were to say that we should build a monument to Osama bin Laden to remember all those great things he did. Oh wait.[/color]
And it's almost like that an omnipotent creator of evil could just as easily uncreate him and avoid all the rigmarole of subliminal satanic images in Lady Gaga music videos,but some plot holes are worth looking over for the sake of a story...like the fucking eagles in LoTR.
See, but then there would be no test for us. In the beginning, our greatest flaw was our perfection. I believe that if God so willed it, he could have us follow him without question. But Satan exists as a balance, an opposition to God that allows us to choose between good and evil, instead of unanimously choosing good because that's all there is. In other words, it's as you said: freedom truly is a double-edged sword. If we didn't have Satan, there would be no point to our lives other than to serve God unquestioningly. Yet because Satan exists, people now have the freedom to oppose God and choose evil over good.
My rationale for this theory: what's the point of being God if the people you created only love you because they have no other choice? There is no point. The world would just be your own dollhouse. In terms of Satan vs. God, our sinful existence is part of a gamble between the two to see whom mankind will follow. If God were to kill Satan right this second, it would be like Satan is playing chess with a monkey who does nothing but jumps on the table, ruins the boardstate, and throws feces everywhere. Being omnipotent may seem cool, but it means nothing if you're all alone. Killing Satan would be to kill the sin in the hearts of all men, removing their freedom to choose good over evil, and therefore removing our ability to willfully choose God. In truth, I don't abhor Satan's existence, I just fight the sinful influences he imposes over my life--the influence to make bad decisions, harm people, and harm myself. To us, Satan isn't so much the physical devil with the two horns as he is the metaphysical negativity in our hearts. In the same way, to us, God isn't so much the all-powerful bearded mastermind behind creation up in the clouds as he is the metaphysical positivity in our hearts. This is at least how I perceive them.
Take note that this is also why God has a minimal influence over the modern world. You don't see miracles being performed in everyday life--you don't see supernatural happenings going on around you. The reason for this is simple: it would be cheating. After Jesus' crucifixion, mankind became responsible for its own decisions, whether good or evil. So long as Satan doesn't decide to send in a wave of demons to slaughter Christians, or God doesn't decide to flood the Earth again (he promised not to), we will be entirely responsible for everything that happens here. That includes the starving African children, the Middle-Eastern conflict, 9/11...everything is our choice.
Think about it. What would you do if you were God, Adam? Just mold people the way you want them to be, and have no "Satan" figure in their life? Just say that morality directly stems from you, and because you command it means it is ultimately good? Well Adam, under normal conditions, I would detest being your personal Lego figurine...but I suppose, if you were God, I would have no choice but to like it, wouldn't I?
Now tell me if I successfully filled that plot-hole in Christianity...because I would hope I did. I was asking my church the same questions you sometimes ask me when I was growing up. But I was able to develop this particular answer myself, and it is a perspective that is shared by a handful of people I know.
No,I don't think you did...False Dichotomy: Just because you don't serve god doesn't mean you serve satan,just as if you don't support the US government and it's activities doesn't mean you're a terrorist hellbent on bringing it down.
"what's the point of being God if the people you created only love you because they have no other choice?"
We don't seem to have any choice in the matter right now as Christianity has been defined to me from numerous other people and places,including the bible itself.Consider: You're walking down an empty street in the city and a man approaches you and pulls out a knife and demands your wallet and cellphone.You refuse and he grabs you and holds the tip of the knife to your throat and makes his demands again.Now not many muggings end in murder,but let's just say this particular one does.Would you describe this as committing suicide?You refused to give him what he wanted,you CHOSE death,you committed suicide!This is the "choice" presented to us whenever Christians talk about hell.So long as hell exists in this equation,there is no choice,there is only coercion.He allows free will,yet when we do make decisions ourselves (not even doing anything "evil" as we would define it,just doing something as simple as not worshipping god) he punishes us for it.Gee,thanks,that's a great choice.
The principle of sin it crap too.God put the tree he didn't want Adam and Eve (two people completely and totally free of the knowledge of good and evil) to eat from right in front of them,told them not to,and then they did it.If they didn't know what evil was,how could they know what they were doing was evil?How can you justifiably punish someone when they didn't know they were committing a crime?And if he knew they would eat of the tree,why bother with it in the first place?Create them in their current state,that would be the lesser of two evils I think,being flawed from the beginning and not falling out of it in such an absurd manner.Again,we have someone being punished by god for exercising the free will god supposedly bestowed upon them.
What I would do if I were god is irrelevant....however,if I were to do things differently from the current god in question...
1: Not be such an egotistical prick.Seriously,half the ten commandments are all about god and they're supposed to talk about how man should govern themselves.No mandatory worship of me,no sacrifices made in the name of me,no laws that people can't offend me,etc.I can't prevent people from doing those things,but I'd go and tell them to stop vivisecting cattle to make me happy.
2: Provide some kind of easily testable method of proving I exist.For instance,I could appear in the capitals of all the cities of the world simultaneously for a couple of hours every day of the week (or hell,forever *edit*).People could ask me questions,I could answer them,I could demonstrate my powers to create something from nothing,etc.I could also visit people personally at their request.
3: Take an active role in the enforcement/punishment of laws and crime.And I wouldn't focus on punishment either,I'd try to actually fucking HELP people get on the right track with their life.They'd be as free to obey or disobey my laws as they are now,they just need to deal with the consequences,and maybe I'll even be able to help them.I'm omnipotent,so I fucking better be able help them.
4: I wouldn't burn people forever for not believing in me,or disrespecting me,or any of the other petty crap that the all-powerful creator of everything god if the bible does...or the gods of the Greek Pantheon,I guess...
5: I would teach people to be able to function in the world without always having to refer to me or ask me for help; "teach a man to fish" and all that.I would write a book perhaps,and make it so that it's impossible to mistranslate my words regardless of language;no mistakes,no wiggle room,every copy would say what I want it to say.It'd contain all the information they'd ever need to know,and if they needed help understanding something,I could help them understand it.
6: If I were to create the earth like it is now,I'd do as I said above and help them learn how to better survive certain natural disasters,and only step in if absolutely necessary,like hitting the big red environmental reset button if something like the Yellowstone Super-volcanoe pops;that,or I'd create some kind of stationary environment where natural disasters don't happen,meaning no tectonic or volcanic activity,no conflicting air currents that cause storms,etc.
I tried to think of examples that would kind of avoid the potholes of the omni-paradoxes that gods seem to have trouble with (I probably missed something somewhere),and kept the morals vague to prevent my ethnocentrism from leaking in (I'm an objectively moral omni-being after all,not bound by the limits of humanity),and I think that's all a pretty good start.*
*These examples are also using the bible as a vague template,and not taking into account all the scientific information we currently have about the origins of the universe,the origins of life,etc,otherwise it'd be a very different narrative.
**Jesus I'm off today,those examples could be better.
And I haven't violated anyone's free will to boot!
Or threatened them.
*Another friend responds,I remark about how some Hindus apparently want a monument of their own*
But I'd be alright with the Hindu statue because at least THEIR religion is also, like Christianity, a positive influence. I mean, if they were to build a statue over by where I live, it would be like my saying "Merry Christmas" to a Jew. Sure, Jews don't celebrate Christmas, but it doesn't mean they can't have a merry December 25th! Alternatively, building a Satanic statue next to a Christian statue intentionally is like a big "fuck you" to the community. Says nothing about diversity, says nothing about love and tolerance. It's just a big "fuck you, I want everyone here to go to Hell."
Anyway, to respond to your craziness up there, Adam:
First, I want to point out that I never made that false dichotomy.
My proposal, simplified, is as follows:
Sin gives man the ability to rebel against God.
Satan "is" sin.
Satan, if erased, would erase sin.
Sin was part of God's plan in giving people choice.
People ought to have choice.
God should not erase Satan.
Now, as for your mugger scenario, I don't know what kind of Fire + Brimstone priest told you that garbage, but that man would not go to Hell. Nobody chooses for themselves to get mugged. That's like saying women choose to get raped. The mugger may think that from your perspective you're choosing to die because you aren't handing over your wallet, but in reality the mugger is the one who is stabbing you. If you would have my limited, mortal judgment, that man would still go to Heaven. I define committing suicide as death by one's own hand. Of course, the only technicality is if you contract with another person, an assassin, to go in your room while you're sleeping, and kill you. It's still suicide because you intended to die. There's some sense of commitment when it comes to suicide. That's why it's called "committing suicide." A parallel to this situation would be the crime vehicular manslaughter. In comparison to committing homicide, vehicular manslaughter is considered a lesser crime because the murder was unintended. There was no "commission" to the homicide. No one intends to die when saying "No" in the face of a threat. The man is saying "No" causes the mugger to deal out a consequence. There is no commission to suicide involved.
Your interpretation of Genesis is quite skewed. All I can really say is that we are to be taught that free will and responsibility have consequences, whether those consequences are fair or unfair. If you think God was being harsh in giving us free will, then so be it. Truth is that these sets of consequences are necessary for us to have choices in life. What's the point of choices without consequences? What's the point of consequences without choice? It would be as if the causes of affects have absolutely no connection whatsoever if consequences weren't necessary.
"How can you justifiably punish someone when they didn't know they were committing a crime?"
Punishments exist to define crimes. Crime isn't crime without punishment, regardless of anyone's foreknowledge.
Also, lol. I'm sorry, that question about what you would do if you were God...it was rhetorical. Nevertheless, your response was entertaining. I would just like to point out one thing you said in point 3.:
"They'd be as free to obey or disobey my laws as they are now,they just need to deal with the consequences"
Bam! Kaboom! Hit the nail on the head. There it is. This is the same thing God has, and yet here you are, unable to understand the perspective I am presenting. Sure, God's laws are more radical than yours would be--"You shall have no other gods before me"--but you admit that you would still have consequences with your laws while allowing people to disobey or obey. Yes, God's punishments are more harsh, but at least because you said that, you get the gist.
Here's the same question posed on Yahoo Answers:
The "Best Answer" is basically my answer, but with Bible Verses.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080130075947AAoidp7
...
Anyway, back to what I was saying. God can't simply "uncreate" Satan. It would infringe too far on everyone's free will, and make worship in Him meaningless, because without sin there would be no alternative [deity] (IE ourselves, Satan, Bhudda, Jelly Donuts, Obama). Obviously, this is assuming everything in the Bible is true. My original intention wasn't to get into an Atheism-Theism rumble with you, but rather to rationalize why I think God cannot erase Satan, contrary to what you stated above. This also supports why I don't think a Satanic statue should be built in the Oklahoma Statehouse...but I suppose that is for them to decide.
My attention span is rapidly depleting and I don't know where to go from here.Am I asking stupid questions,making stupid points?Am I just filling my arguments with non-sequiturs?Am I flat out fully retarded?
He's green,I'm red.
I don't understand Satanists. If they read the Bible to the point of acknowledging the existence of Satan, then how come they intentionally choose the losing side? To acknowledge Satan is to acknowledge God's creation of Satan, and therefore, they acknowledge the existence of Jesus Christ and the remission of sins. So one can conclude that the ultimate goal of a Satanist is to misguide people. Seems like a pretty shitty goal to me, which is enough of a reason to reject their proposal for a statue. At least whether you believe in Christianity or not, the ultimate goal of a Christian is salvation for all, not damnation for all.
It's as if someone were to say that we should build a monument to Osama bin Laden to remember all those great things he did. Oh wait.[/color]
And it's almost like that an omnipotent creator of evil could just as easily uncreate him and avoid all the rigmarole of subliminal satanic images in Lady Gaga music videos,but some plot holes are worth looking over for the sake of a story...like the fucking eagles in LoTR.
See, but then there would be no test for us. In the beginning, our greatest flaw was our perfection. I believe that if God so willed it, he could have us follow him without question. But Satan exists as a balance, an opposition to God that allows us to choose between good and evil, instead of unanimously choosing good because that's all there is. In other words, it's as you said: freedom truly is a double-edged sword. If we didn't have Satan, there would be no point to our lives other than to serve God unquestioningly. Yet because Satan exists, people now have the freedom to oppose God and choose evil over good.
My rationale for this theory: what's the point of being God if the people you created only love you because they have no other choice? There is no point. The world would just be your own dollhouse. In terms of Satan vs. God, our sinful existence is part of a gamble between the two to see whom mankind will follow. If God were to kill Satan right this second, it would be like Satan is playing chess with a monkey who does nothing but jumps on the table, ruins the boardstate, and throws feces everywhere. Being omnipotent may seem cool, but it means nothing if you're all alone. Killing Satan would be to kill the sin in the hearts of all men, removing their freedom to choose good over evil, and therefore removing our ability to willfully choose God. In truth, I don't abhor Satan's existence, I just fight the sinful influences he imposes over my life--the influence to make bad decisions, harm people, and harm myself. To us, Satan isn't so much the physical devil with the two horns as he is the metaphysical negativity in our hearts. In the same way, to us, God isn't so much the all-powerful bearded mastermind behind creation up in the clouds as he is the metaphysical positivity in our hearts. This is at least how I perceive them.
Take note that this is also why God has a minimal influence over the modern world. You don't see miracles being performed in everyday life--you don't see supernatural happenings going on around you. The reason for this is simple: it would be cheating. After Jesus' crucifixion, mankind became responsible for its own decisions, whether good or evil. So long as Satan doesn't decide to send in a wave of demons to slaughter Christians, or God doesn't decide to flood the Earth again (he promised not to), we will be entirely responsible for everything that happens here. That includes the starving African children, the Middle-Eastern conflict, 9/11...everything is our choice.
Think about it. What would you do if you were God, Adam? Just mold people the way you want them to be, and have no "Satan" figure in their life? Just say that morality directly stems from you, and because you command it means it is ultimately good? Well Adam, under normal conditions, I would detest being your personal Lego figurine...but I suppose, if you were God, I would have no choice but to like it, wouldn't I?
Now tell me if I successfully filled that plot-hole in Christianity...because I would hope I did. I was asking my church the same questions you sometimes ask me when I was growing up. But I was able to develop this particular answer myself, and it is a perspective that is shared by a handful of people I know.
No,I don't think you did...False Dichotomy: Just because you don't serve god doesn't mean you serve satan,just as if you don't support the US government and it's activities doesn't mean you're a terrorist hellbent on bringing it down.
"what's the point of being God if the people you created only love you because they have no other choice?"
We don't seem to have any choice in the matter right now as Christianity has been defined to me from numerous other people and places,including the bible itself.Consider: You're walking down an empty street in the city and a man approaches you and pulls out a knife and demands your wallet and cellphone.You refuse and he grabs you and holds the tip of the knife to your throat and makes his demands again.Now not many muggings end in murder,but let's just say this particular one does.Would you describe this as committing suicide?You refused to give him what he wanted,you CHOSE death,you committed suicide!This is the "choice" presented to us whenever Christians talk about hell.So long as hell exists in this equation,there is no choice,there is only coercion.He allows free will,yet when we do make decisions ourselves (not even doing anything "evil" as we would define it,just doing something as simple as not worshipping god) he punishes us for it.Gee,thanks,that's a great choice.
The principle of sin it crap too.God put the tree he didn't want Adam and Eve (two people completely and totally free of the knowledge of good and evil) to eat from right in front of them,told them not to,and then they did it.If they didn't know what evil was,how could they know what they were doing was evil?How can you justifiably punish someone when they didn't know they were committing a crime?And if he knew they would eat of the tree,why bother with it in the first place?Create them in their current state,that would be the lesser of two evils I think,being flawed from the beginning and not falling out of it in such an absurd manner.Again,we have someone being punished by god for exercising the free will god supposedly bestowed upon them.
What I would do if I were god is irrelevant....however,if I were to do things differently from the current god in question...
1: Not be such an egotistical prick.Seriously,half the ten commandments are all about god and they're supposed to talk about how man should govern themselves.No mandatory worship of me,no sacrifices made in the name of me,no laws that people can't offend me,etc.I can't prevent people from doing those things,but I'd go and tell them to stop vivisecting cattle to make me happy.
2: Provide some kind of easily testable method of proving I exist.For instance,I could appear in the capitals of all the cities of the world simultaneously for a couple of hours every day of the week (or hell,forever *edit*).People could ask me questions,I could answer them,I could demonstrate my powers to create something from nothing,etc.I could also visit people personally at their request.
3: Take an active role in the enforcement/punishment of laws and crime.And I wouldn't focus on punishment either,I'd try to actually fucking HELP people get on the right track with their life.They'd be as free to obey or disobey my laws as they are now,they just need to deal with the consequences,and maybe I'll even be able to help them.I'm omnipotent,so I fucking better be able help them.
4: I wouldn't burn people forever for not believing in me,or disrespecting me,or any of the other petty crap that the all-powerful creator of everything god if the bible does...or the gods of the Greek Pantheon,I guess...
5: I would teach people to be able to function in the world without always having to refer to me or ask me for help; "teach a man to fish" and all that.I would write a book perhaps,and make it so that it's impossible to mistranslate my words regardless of language;no mistakes,no wiggle room,every copy would say what I want it to say.It'd contain all the information they'd ever need to know,and if they needed help understanding something,I could help them understand it.
6: If I were to create the earth like it is now,I'd do as I said above and help them learn how to better survive certain natural disasters,and only step in if absolutely necessary,like hitting the big red environmental reset button if something like the Yellowstone Super-volcanoe pops;that,or I'd create some kind of stationary environment where natural disasters don't happen,meaning no tectonic or volcanic activity,no conflicting air currents that cause storms,etc.
I tried to think of examples that would kind of avoid the potholes of the omni-paradoxes that gods seem to have trouble with (I probably missed something somewhere),and kept the morals vague to prevent my ethnocentrism from leaking in (I'm an objectively moral omni-being after all,not bound by the limits of humanity),and I think that's all a pretty good start.*
*These examples are also using the bible as a vague template,and not taking into account all the scientific information we currently have about the origins of the universe,the origins of life,etc,otherwise it'd be a very different narrative.
**Jesus I'm off today,those examples could be better.
And I haven't violated anyone's free will to boot!
Or threatened them.
*Another friend responds,I remark about how some Hindus apparently want a monument of their own*
But I'd be alright with the Hindu statue because at least THEIR religion is also, like Christianity, a positive influence. I mean, if they were to build a statue over by where I live, it would be like my saying "Merry Christmas" to a Jew. Sure, Jews don't celebrate Christmas, but it doesn't mean they can't have a merry December 25th! Alternatively, building a Satanic statue next to a Christian statue intentionally is like a big "fuck you" to the community. Says nothing about diversity, says nothing about love and tolerance. It's just a big "fuck you, I want everyone here to go to Hell."
Anyway, to respond to your craziness up there, Adam:
First, I want to point out that I never made that false dichotomy.
My proposal, simplified, is as follows:
Sin gives man the ability to rebel against God.
Satan "is" sin.
Satan, if erased, would erase sin.
Sin was part of God's plan in giving people choice.
People ought to have choice.
God should not erase Satan.
Now, as for your mugger scenario, I don't know what kind of Fire + Brimstone priest told you that garbage, but that man would not go to Hell. Nobody chooses for themselves to get mugged. That's like saying women choose to get raped. The mugger may think that from your perspective you're choosing to die because you aren't handing over your wallet, but in reality the mugger is the one who is stabbing you. If you would have my limited, mortal judgment, that man would still go to Heaven. I define committing suicide as death by one's own hand. Of course, the only technicality is if you contract with another person, an assassin, to go in your room while you're sleeping, and kill you. It's still suicide because you intended to die. There's some sense of commitment when it comes to suicide. That's why it's called "committing suicide." A parallel to this situation would be the crime vehicular manslaughter. In comparison to committing homicide, vehicular manslaughter is considered a lesser crime because the murder was unintended. There was no "commission" to the homicide. No one intends to die when saying "No" in the face of a threat. The man is saying "No" causes the mugger to deal out a consequence. There is no commission to suicide involved.
Your interpretation of Genesis is quite skewed. All I can really say is that we are to be taught that free will and responsibility have consequences, whether those consequences are fair or unfair. If you think God was being harsh in giving us free will, then so be it. Truth is that these sets of consequences are necessary for us to have choices in life. What's the point of choices without consequences? What's the point of consequences without choice? It would be as if the causes of affects have absolutely no connection whatsoever if consequences weren't necessary.
"How can you justifiably punish someone when they didn't know they were committing a crime?"
Punishments exist to define crimes. Crime isn't crime without punishment, regardless of anyone's foreknowledge.
Also, lol. I'm sorry, that question about what you would do if you were God...it was rhetorical. Nevertheless, your response was entertaining. I would just like to point out one thing you said in point 3.:
"They'd be as free to obey or disobey my laws as they are now,they just need to deal with the consequences"
Bam! Kaboom! Hit the nail on the head. There it is. This is the same thing God has, and yet here you are, unable to understand the perspective I am presenting. Sure, God's laws are more radical than yours would be--"You shall have no other gods before me"--but you admit that you would still have consequences with your laws while allowing people to disobey or obey. Yes, God's punishments are more harsh, but at least because you said that, you get the gist.
Here's the same question posed on Yahoo Answers:
The "Best Answer" is basically my answer, but with Bible Verses.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080130075947AAoidp7
...
Anyway, back to what I was saying. God can't simply "uncreate" Satan. It would infringe too far on everyone's free will, and make worship in Him meaningless, because without sin there would be no alternative [deity] (IE ourselves, Satan, Bhudda, Jelly Donuts, Obama). Obviously, this is assuming everything in the Bible is true. My original intention wasn't to get into an Atheism-Theism rumble with you, but rather to rationalize why I think God cannot erase Satan, contrary to what you stated above. This also supports why I don't think a Satanic statue should be built in the Oklahoma Statehouse...but I suppose that is for them to decide.
