Satan, a big, red, herring

[Synystyr]

I couldn't make this up... Much like the "why people laugh at creationists" series, episode 29, this Christian tries to explain things about how good and bad have to exist, "bad is good because it lets us know what good is, god is good for giving us bad etc", basically justifying atrocities when he wants to, all this nonsense... So then he busts out his philosophy hat, which I think is more of a tin foil hat. He makes this argument.

This is philosophical so it may go above some heads..ask questions if you don't understand...Good cannot exist without Bad. It can't, it wouldn't be able to. For you to have a "bad" moment, you'd have to have a "good" moment, and vice-versa. Not "you" persay, but someone, somewhere (existence isn't limited to one person).

This falls flat on its face, unless you're ready to defend this:

"God cannot exist without no god."


If you understand this, then you might understand why "satan" is an intricate part of most faiths; it provides a red herring to paper-over the true corrosive logic required to refute the claim of a creator.


He then responds with this...

What are you talking about..that makes sense..that's why God is a singularity, there is 1 God, and no other. His existence is the opposite of him not existing, what are you talking about, that got right back up and walked. Do you have a opposite? You exist, and there is no other existence of you, that's your opposite.

And more specifically, he addressed my satan comment, and pwned himself by his own definitions.

How is he a red herring? His existence in no way changes the argument, he is the opposite of God, that's the "other" God if you wanted to place him as the opposite.

So lets recap, a creationist can go from

there is 1 God, and no other. His existence is the opposite of him not existing

To

he (satan) is the opposite of God, that's the "other" God if you wanted to place him as the opposite.

I didn't respond to his contradictions, I felt like I wasted too much time already because this exchange was only 1/5 of our conversation. I felt it was lulzworthy to share.

 

[blackmetaljesus]

So, the conclusion is that christans are dumb? Well, ok, that's not exactly newsworthy or particularly fresh material.

Besides, any humour the story could have had was ruined by your use of the word "lulz". Easilly the dumbest phrase in existance.

 

[Aught3]

lol, that is pretty funny. These people twist themselves into saying all sorts of nutty things.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

When you have to turn yourself into a giant pretzel to justify your beliefs, maybe it is time to admit that your beliefs aren't worth keeping?

 

[doloafing]

I hate when Christians bust out the philosophy. I'm not great at philosophy, but I'm not dishonest enough to pretend I've got a PhD in the subject.

 

[Synystyr]

I hate when Christians bust out the philosophy. I'm not great at philosophy, but I'm not dishonest enough to pretend I've got a PhD in the subject.

Ego masturbation is a common trait in these so-called "humble" Christians.

 

[GegoXAREN]

(Ignoring all posts and only reads a few lines of the first post.)

what if a "red herring"?
I do not quite get the reference...

I have never seen a red herring!


EDIT:
he hehhehehe ghahahhahhhhaa!

FOR THE LULZ!

 

[Canto]

There are only 2 logical things to say about god. He either exists, or does not exist. There is no need for Satan or any other antigod to prove that god exists. There is also no way to rationalize Satan being "on par" with, or the negative equivalent of god by using the bible itself. Satan in the bible is shown to be a fallen angel. Being an angel alone makes one subordinate to god and not an equal. Being a fallen angel cast out from gods grace would make you even LESS of an equal I would think.

Satan is just an attempt to make abrahamic religions look more like the early religions where there is almost always a Good and Bad pantheon of gods at work.

Therefore, Satan can not be used to justify gods existance.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

There are only 2 logical things to say about god. He either exists, or does not exist. There is no need for Satan or any other antigod to prove that god exists. There is also no way to rationalize Satan being "on par" with, or the negative equivalent of god by using the bible itself. Satan in the bible is shown to be a fallen angel. Being an angel alone makes one subordinate to god and not an equal. Being a fallen angel cast out from gods grace would make you even LESS of an equal I would think.

Satan is just an attempt to make abrahamic religions look more like the early religions where there is almost always a Good and Bad pantheon of gods at work.

Therefore, Satan can not be used to justify gods existance.

It is also a lame attempt to excuse their imaginary friend's more psychotic character traits. Blame "Satan" and/or blame the need for "balance" to explain away the problem of evil. The god of the Bible is a sociopathic, homicidal lunatic with an inferiority complex.

 

[GegoXAREN]

em... What is a "red herring"?

 

[ImprobableJoe]

em... What is a "red herring"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring_(narrative)

 

[Synystyr]

em... What is a "red herring"?

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:red+herring&ei=PzvaSYjuONzslQej75neDA&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

A red herring is an argument, given in reply, that does not address the original issue. Critically, a red herring is a deliberate attempt to change the subject or divert the argument.

 

[Personal SinR]

Red Herring = A distraction

 

[King Tyrant Lizard]

Ego masturbation is a common trait in these so-called "humble" Christians.

I agree. They are completely unlike ardent anti-theists who never behave that way.

 

[Synystyr]

I agree. They are completely unlike ardent anti-theists who never behave that way.

I reward myself with humor for my achievements, err, "achievements" of others.

 

[Synystyr]

Lol, he decided to respond to his own contradiction. Get ready for backpedaling.

I said

if you wanted to place him as the opposite.

That would be up to you if you wanted to place him as that. For this reason: God existed before the devil was considered "the devil", and so, where did the evil come from? Well, there was sin in existence (adam ate the apple in the garden) but wasn't personified, in which case, it simply was..when the devil came about, it became personified, an opposite of God if you will. I do not mind if people think either way, using the devil or not is up to you, which is why I said IF YOU WANTED TO, I did not contradict myself in the slightest.

Whenever you feel like calling upon satan to be your scapegoat, its totally optional from the looks of it.

 

[GoodKat]

Well, there was sin in existence (adam ate the apple in the garden) but wasn't personified, in which case, it simply was..when the devil came about, it became personified, an opposite of God if you will.

Then who tempted Eve to eat the fruit?

 

[Synystyr]

Then who tempted Eve to eat the fruit?

I'll ask him that. Get ready for "Eve was a woman". :roll: Also, talking snake time.

 

[AntiSkill42]

"Oh you walking on the left hand path !! Who has deciphered the magic letters around the Baphomet, for it means "made in Taiwan"."

"The Eleven Satanic Rules of the Earth:

1. Do not give opinions or advice unless you are asked.

2. Do not tell your troubles to others unless you are sure they want to hear them.

3. When in another?s lair, show him respect or else do not go there.

4. If a guest in your lair annoys you, treat him cruelly and without mercy.

5. Do not make sexual advances unless you are given the mating signal.

6. Do not take that which does not belong to you unless it is a burden to the other person and he cries out to be relieved.

7. Acknowledge the power of magic if you have employed it successfully to obtain your desires. If you deny the power of magic after having called upon it with success, you will lose all you have obtained.

8. Do not complain about anything to which you need not subject yourself.

9. Do not harm little children.

10. Do not kill non-human animals unless you are attacked or for your food.

11. When walking in open territory, bother no one. If someone bothers you, ask him to stop. If he does not stop, destroy him.



From by Anton Szandor LaVey ?1967
http://www.churchofsatan.com/home.html"

 

[sckewer]

I really hate when creationists claim to use philosophy. First of all when its a logical proof for the existence or non existence of God(s) it is not philosophy, it is theology. Second, they make such ridiculous arguments that when they don't get called on it not being philosophy they make real philosophy look like nonsense as well. Philosophy when practiced properly is supposed to be as rigorous as science.