Who's stronger? God or Satan? [Archive]

Speelgoedmannetje

12-15-2004, 11:24 AM

bjjones37 wrote:
I can take a gun and end a human life, but I could not restore that person. I could burn down a building, but I would not know how to rebuild it. I could take the classic works of art, music, literature ... the work or years, even decades, by Brahms, Mozart, DaVici, Michaelangelo. I could destroy them all in one day. But once destroyed, I could never bring them back into existence. It has always been easier to destroy than to create.yup, quite right about that, quite wise this is also, Jean Sibelius said something alike, but then about critics.
But then, also, if there's nothing created, there's nothing to destroy :-P

FluffyMcDeath

12-15-2004, 11:36 AM

bjjones37 wrote:
Satan is a created being, same as you and I. He has a will and freedom of choice, just as you and I. But what God has made, he can just as easily unmake.

OK. So the next question of course is: "what is he waiting for?"

Humanity, God wiped out with a flood when He saw what a bad bunch they were. Satan, he chums about with: they talk, they gamble. What gives?

bjjones37

12-15-2004, 12:57 PM

FluffyMcDeath wrote:
OK. So the next question of course is: "what is he waiting for?"

Humanity, God wiped out with a flood when He saw what a bad bunch they were. Satan, he chums about with: they talk, they gamble. What gives?

Well he did not quite wipe out humanity. We are still here after all. :-) The Earth was actually fairly sparsely populated at the time.

That is a good question though. What is he waiting for? When Jesus Christ was born, we entered into a new age in our relationship with God as a species. Eventually God's judgement on Satan will be mandated. But it will be final judgement, period, for everyone. God wants to recover as much of his estranged creation as possible. The trick is, it has to be voluntary. He will not force anyone to come to him. So he waits, and waits, and waits. He wants to give every possible opportunity to every person alive to get to know him that wishes to. So he waits for just one more soul, and one more, and one more, and ..........

FluffyMcDeath

12-15-2004, 01:49 PM

bjjones37 wrote:

That is a good question though. What is he waiting for? When Jesus Christ was born, we entered into a new age in our relationship with God as a species. Eventually God's judgement on Satan will be mandated. But it will be final judgement, period, for everyone. God wants to recover as much of his estranged creation as possible. The trick is, it has to be voluntary. He will not force anyone to come to him. So he waits, and waits, and waits. He wants to give every possible opportunity to every person alive to get to know him that wishes to. So he waits for just one more soul, and one more, and one more, and ..........

So now we have some more questions.

How long will he wait? Obviously for as long as there are people reproducing.

Since He "wants to recover as much of his estranged creation as possible", does that include Satan?

Does God actually know everything from the beginning of time until the end, and if so, doesn't He already know how everything turns out? Can't He just skip the intervening time and take a shortcut?

If God had destroyed Satan before populating the garden, how would this have made coming to God any less voluntary? Wouldn't the only difference be that there'd be a lot less evil around?

Dan

12-15-2004, 02:26 PM

cecilia wrote:
this sounds like the 'who would win in a fight, Batman or Superman'?
(or insert any other superhero type).

answer: who cares? :-D
That depends on which version of Superman and Batman.
The ones in the current mainstream comics: Batman( he did this a couple of months ago)
The Communist Superman in The Red Son graphic novel vs any (or all) Batman: Communist Superman in a blink ofhiseye[b]

Dan

12-15-2004, 02:30 PM

Haven´t you read Neal Gaimans Sandman?
Satan retired.
I call that a win.

bjjones37

12-15-2004, 02:36 PM

FluffyMcDeath wrote:

So now we have some more questions.

How long will he wait? Obviously for as long as there are people reproducing.

Since He "wants to recover as much of his estranged creation as possible", does that include Satan?

Does God actually know everything from the beginning of time until the end, and if so, doesn't He already know how everything turns out? Can't He just skip the intervening time and take a shortcut?

If God had destroyed Satan before populating the garden, how would this have made coming to God any less voluntary? Wouldn't the only difference be that there'd be a lot less evil around?

Most of this I could not begin to answer. Various people have claimed to know, for example, when Christ will return from the Bible. But the Bible states that no man will know the day nor the hour of his return. So they contradict the Bible by claiming to know. How long will he wait? Maybe one day, maybe 100,000 years. Only God truly knows. I suspect it has more to do with peoples hearts than any given timescale, but I am only guessing.

To include Satan, Satan would have to accept Jesus Christ. I see that as quite unlikely, perhaps impossible. The Bible certainly does not address the issue of Satan's redemption. But it was given for men on earth, not creatures of pure spirit. I really could not say how it would apply to them. So I really could not answer that question either, except to say that God's mercy is incredible, so maybe it is potentially possible. From what I understand of God's word, extremely doubtful though.

There are those that claim that God knows the future and everything that is going to happen. I do not believe this. I do not limit God in that way. I go one step further and say that God knows every possible action, every possible destiny, every possible decision we could make, every possible path. He knows our every possible fate. It is up to us to select which one we will live. This is called free will. We have to make our own decisions concerning him.

Let us say that Satan never existed at all. Bear in mind that he was not created evil. If Satan had never existed, there would be no tempter, no one trying to deliberately sabotage our opportunity to know God. But you would still have your free will. You would still have a choice.

There might have been less evil around, I really cannot say for sure but it seems likely. Satan seeks to motivate men to do things while making them think it was their own idea. Without that hidden external influence, we would still have the obvious visible ones.

I will be the first to admit that I do not understand everything concerning this, but I do trust God.

bjjones37

12-15-2004, 02:40 PM

Dan wrote:

cecilia wrote:
this sounds like the 'who would win in a fight, Batman or Superman'?
(or insert any other superhero type).

answer: who cares? :-D
That depends on which version of Superman and Batman.
The ones in the current mainstream comics: Batman( he did this a couple of months ago)
The Communist Superman in The Red Son graphic novel vs any (or all) Batman: Communist Superman in a blink ofhiseye[b]

The Gospel According to DC Comics. Was that in the Dead Sea scrolls? :-D

Dan

12-15-2004, 02:56 PM

This time of the year?
Santa Claus!!!!

Dan

12-15-2004, 03:00 PM

bjjones37 wrote:
The Gospel According to DC Comics. Was that in the Dead Sea scrolls? :-D
Actually the creators of Superman was jewish.;-)
Somebody even did a serious thesis on the similarities between Golem in jewish litterature and Superman.

bjjones37

12-15-2004, 03:47 PM

Dan wrote:

bjjones37 wrote:
The Gospel According to DC Comics. Was that in the Dead Sea scrolls? :-D
Actually the creators of Superman was jewish.;-)
Somebody even did a serious thesis on the similarities between Golem in jewish litterature and Superman.

I have always preferred Batman to Superman myself. But Spiderman is my all-time favorite. :-)

McNorris

12-17-2004, 09:55 PM

More have died at the end of a sword (or other device) in the name of Jesus (or Mohammed or Buddha) than in the name of Satan (or other nasty).

Of course there are a million sorry cop-outs for this.

I worship the feats of man and hope for an afterlife with personage along the lines of Elvis or Ray Charles, beer without hangovers, auto that don't rust, and pretty women that don't nag. (badda-bing) :-)

Dan

12-18-2004, 07:29 AM

T_Bone

12-18-2004, 08:26 AM

There are those that claim that God knows the future and everything that is going to happen. I do not believe this. I do not limit God in that way. I go one step further and say that God knows every possible action, every possible destiny, every possible decision we could make, every possible path. He knows our every possible fate. It is up to us to select which one we will live. This is called free will. We have to make our own decisions concerning him.

If God is powerfull enough to know every possible action, then he knows the future. it can be easily (!) calcuated from the position, direction of travel, etc of the particles in our current universe.

At a low enough level, the future is predetermined already.

Karlos

12-18-2004, 09:25 AM

As far as I understand the abrahamic religions, the answer is God, without question.

However, from a theological view point, perhaps the question should be, "Who is man more readily influenced by?"

McNorris

12-18-2004, 01:27 PM

"How Pagan"

Not even! I am not "scared of the night." I don't dance for rain or try to appease vengfull spirits of the dead it any number of silly little ways.

When I say worship man I talkin':

skyskrapers
cars
computers
math
paintings
music
the form of the human body
the rational mind
etc...

Of course I would really call this worship per say. For instance I don't honor cars by pretending to eat them. (see crazy eastern death cult Christianity) :-)

And before anyone flames, yes I do have Christian friends and they are perfectly nice people. I have always thought it a little weird, the whole "the body and the blood."

FluffyMcDeath

12-19-2004, 04:15 PM

Karlos wrote:
As far as I understand the abrahamic religions, the answer is God, without question.

However, from a theological view point, perhaps the question should be, "Who is man more readily influenced by?"

Which leads straight to the question I was asking before. If God is so good and loves us, and if he is so much more powerful thatn Satan, why does he let Satan get away with so much?

12-19-2004, 08:28 PM

FluffyMcDeath wrote:

Karlos wrote:
As far as I understand the abrahamic religions, the answer is God, without question.

However, from a theological view point, perhaps the question should be, "Who is man more readily influenced by?"

Which leads straight to the question I was asking before. If God is so good and loves us, and if he is so much more powerful thatn Satan, why does he let Satan get away with so much?

Because God is our father, and like any good parent he let's his children make their own way in life, and if that includes making mistakes then so be it.

At least I think that's the correct terminology that Christians use.

Is that right bj? ;-)

the_leander

12-19-2004, 11:21 PM

McNorris wrote:
"How Pagan"

Not even! I am not "scared of the night." I don't dance for rain or try to appease vengfull spirits of the dead it any number of silly little ways.

"How Derogatory" would be how I describe that, though in place of derogatory, I might put arrogant or any number of similar words along those lines.

"scared of the night?" Spare me. :roll: :rtfm: :laughing:

FluffyMcDeath

12-20-2004, 01:00 AM

mdma wrote:

FluffyMcDeath wrote:
[...] If God is so good and loves us, and if he is so much more powerful thatn Satan, why does he let Satan get away with so much?

Because God is our father, and like any good parent he let's his children make their own way in life, and if that includes making mistakes then so be it.

Except when He's massacring His kids for not doing as He would like them to do. Sounds fair.

bjjones37

12-20-2004, 08:25 AM

FluffyMcDeath wrote:

Which leads straight to the question I was asking before. If God is so good and loves us, and if he is so much more powerful thatn Satan, why does he let Satan get away with so much?

Another good question which has plagued Christians for centuries. Why do people suffer? Why do innocents die? Why does he not intervene more often? Why is Satan allowed to continue influencing people?

Let us say - just for sake of discussion - that you were taught to believe in God. That you had never been taught opposing viewpoints. You would then, having no alternatives, simply believe God by default. But then, the first time your belief was challenged with opposing viewpoints and seemingly contradictory facts, you would be thrown into confusion and not know what to believe. Being forced to look at both sides of an issue provides a certain strength of conviction.

It is within the forge of conflict that the steel of conviction is forged. Through suffering we learn patience. Through loss, we learn to appreciate what we have. Through the needs in our life we are forced to come to God and reason with him. The more Satan interferes with our lives, the more we learn to trust God and allow him to overcome that interference. As in any relationship, if there were no challenges, there would be no depth to the relationship.

I do not grieve over the death of a child of God. I will not grieve at my own death when it comes. Yes, we have an instinct of self preservation and a will to live. But death for me will be an opportunity to go from life to life, to go home once and for all.

Ultimately, Satan really cannot force anyone to do anything. Men choose for themselves to perform actions either good or bad. Yes, men have done many wicked things in the name of religion - but it was men that did them, not God. God simply give us a free will, and a choice.

Satan's greatest power is simply that of deception. It is not always easy to see through his web of lies, especially if we deny the fact that he exists. Here again, we need God help to do so. God never intended that we bear the burden of this existence without his help. I would rather face the hardships of life with God's help, than be comfortably well off without him and never come to know him at all.

Speelgoedmannetje

12-20-2004, 08:34 AM

Think you're forgetting the countless concentration camps where the smoke was thick of burned dead human bodies. Last century that was. Slaughter on an industrial scale.
Forgetting the countless centuries of rape, torture and murder.

Without excuses.

bjjones37

12-20-2004, 08:56 AM

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
Think you're forgetting the countless concentration camps where the smoke was thick of burned dead human bodies. Last century that was. Slaughter on an industrial scale.
Forgetting the countless centuries of rape, torture and murder.

Without excuses.

Am I? Was it not men who did these things? Was it not the choices that they made - to kill and destroy? When God does judge, his judgement wil be final. Until then he shows remarkable restraint. How many truly innocent have ever walked the face of this planet? I know of only one. So God is patient with both the greater and lesser evil. If all men would turn their hearts to God, there would never be any slaughter at all. Do not blame an innocent God for the wickedness of men.

Speelgoedmannetje

12-20-2004, 09:08 AM

If you gonna watch all these atrocities being performed while you can do everything about it (for being allmighty), you're equally guilty methinks. Like sitting comfortably on the sofa, with a softdrink and a bag of crisps, as if watching telly, but instead watching a good torture.
If all men would turn their hearts to God, there would never be any slaughter at allYes, IF all men this or that, well, equally, if everybody was like me, there wouldn't be any slaughter either, but that's not reality, now is it? And is it a needed to turn your heart to God to be a pacifist?

bloodline

12-20-2004, 09:34 AM

bjjones37 wrote:

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
Think you're forgetting the countless concentration camps where the smoke was thick of burned dead human bodies. Last century that was. Slaughter on an industrial scale.
Forgetting the countless centuries of rape, torture and murder.

Without excuses.

Am I? Was it not men who did these things? Was it not the choices that they made - to kill and destroy? When God does judge, his judgement wil be final. Until then he shows remarkable restraint. How many truly innocent have ever walked the face of this planet? I know of only one. So God is patient with both the greater and lesser evil. If all men would turn their hearts to God, there would never be any slaughter at all. Do not blame an innocent God for the wickedness of men.

Without meaning to jump into a conversation I have no part of... God appears to be either impotent or apathetic, rather than patient.

bjjones37

12-20-2004, 09:37 AM

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
If you gonna watch all these atrocities being performed while you can do everything about it (for being allmighty), you're equally guilty methinks. Like sitting comfortably on the sofa, with a softdrink and a bag of crisps, as if watching telly, but instead watching a good torture.
If all men would turn their hearts to God, there would never be any slaughter at allYes, if all men this or that, well, equally, if everybody was like me, there wouldn't be any slaughter either, but that's not reality, now is it? And is it a needed to turn your heart to God to be a pacifist?

The point here is that God is not partial. When he pronounces final judgement, it will be final, period. There will be no more generations being born. If he had done this just because of the wickeness of man, it would have happened thousands of years ago and neither of us would have had the opportunity to even be born. He will not interfere with the lives of men. But neither will he hold them guiltless. Personally I am grateful for an opportunity to have been born and lived.

If all were God's children, there would be no motives on anyones part to kill. The only thing needed to turn our hearts to God, is a decision. Pacifism can be just as guilty of atrocity as warmongering can. Ask Neville Chamberlain about that one. If God patiently waits while some men die, to give others a chance to live, I cannot fault him in that.

We tend to think in terms of the here and now. God thinks in terms of eternity. We will live forever, one way or another. We are concerned about where we are now. God is concerned about where we will be in eternity, forever.

bloodline

12-20-2004, 09:41 AM

We tend to think in terms of the here and now. God thinks in terms of eternity. We will live forever, one way or another. We are concerned about where we are now. God is concerned about where we will be in eternity, forever

Actually it's people who think in terms of eternity (i.e. an unchanging certainty)... the Universe on the other hand has very few constants, and certainly on a macroscopic scale (eg ours) nothing is contant at all but forever changing.

bjjones37

12-20-2004, 09:55 AM

bloodline wrote:
We tend to think in terms of the here and now. God thinks in terms of eternity. We will live forever, one way or another. We are concerned about where we are now. God is concerned about where we will be in eternity, forever

Actually it's people who think in terms of eternity (i.e. an unchanging certainty)... the Universe on the other hand has very few constants, and certainly on a macroscopic scale (eg ours) nothing is contant at all but forever changing.

Most people do not consider their future beyond the grave. They see their individual life as being finite. Interesting that, as you say, they would view the universe in terms of infinity, but life in terms of finite. Regardless, the spirit which animates this mortal flesh is immortal. The soul which contains my intelligence, my personality, my emotions. My physical body is but a window which allows it (me) to express some part of itself (myself).

Speelgoedmannetje

12-20-2004, 09:57 AM

yet when I'm hungry I get grumpy

bjjones37

12-20-2004, 10:03 AM

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
yet when I'm hungry I get grumpy

:-) Yes, very true. As I said, the body is a window. Actually, grumpiness is a choice. Through force of will, you can exert other emotions. We are after all creatures of habit, in our emotions as well. But we can rise above the physical imperatives of our bodies. Those instincts and imperatives are there to help ensure the physical survival of our body. But we can nonetheless rise above them.

Speelgoedmannetje

12-20-2004, 10:14 AM

bjjones37 wrote:
But we can nonetheless rise above them.hm, tell that to ppl with down-syndrome or alike.

bjjones37

12-20-2004, 10:21 AM

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:

bjjones37 wrote:
But we can nonetheless rise above them.hm, tell that to ppl with down-syndrome or alike.

If a window is cracked, our perception through it will be distorted. Same if it is dirty. This is just an analogy I know. But it does clarify what I am trying to say. Say a person is in an accident and suffers brain damage. This may entail memory loss, or even loss of intellect. Does this mean he is now inferior or less of a person? I submit to you that the soul of that person is every bit as vital and valuable as it was before. It is only the "window" that is damaged. So the severely mentally retarded, or the physically incapacitated, are every bit as valuable in God's eyes as "normal" people. When they discard the mortal shell, all of these limitations will disappear.

Speelgoedmannetje

12-20-2004, 11:30 AM

I think that's a scary thought.

And I wasn't thinking of a someone who has the down-syndrome being less or more than anyone else, I was thinking of him/her being that way - because of circumstances.
Maybe you should read a little more about mental disorders/deviations. I for instance, "suffer" from the Asperger syndrome. Do I call it limitations wich I have? Would I be "normal" in the afterlife? :nervous:

bjjones37

12-20-2004, 11:47 AM

Speelgoedmannetje wrote:
I think that's a scary thought.

And I wasn't thinking of a someone who has the down-syndrome being less or more than anyone else, I was thinking of him/her being that way - because of circumstances.
Maybe you should read a little more about mental disorders/deviations. I for instance, "suffer" from the Asperger syndrome. Do I call it limitations wich I have? Would I be "normal" in the afterlife? :nervous:

Interesting perspective. Do you consider it a limitation? Or simply a character attribute? Societal norms need not necessarily be "normal". There is a considerable range in variation of human personality. We should all be capable of functioning within a social environment. But that does not restrict us in terms of social preferences. I prefer interactions to be one-on-one personally and usually avoid social engagements with large groups of people involved. In the afterlife physical, emotional (yes even psychological), and mental barriers will be removed. (Barriers produced by imperfections within our "window".) We will still be unique individuals with unique personalities. You will still be you. :-)

Speelgoedmannetje

12-20-2004, 12:14 PM

bjjones37 wrote:
Interesting perspective. Do you consider it a limitation? Or simply a character attribute? It has it's limitations, and it has it's advantages. But I consider it as an character attribute.

bloodline

12-21-2004, 06:08 AM

bjjones37 wrote:

bloodline wrote:
We tend to think in terms of the here and now. God thinks in terms of eternity. We will live forever, one way or another. We are concerned about where we are now. God is concerned about where we will be in eternity, forever

Actually it's people who think in terms of eternity (i.e. an unchanging certainty)... the Universe on the other hand has very few constants, and certainly on a macroscopic scale (eg ours) nothing is contant at all but forever changing.

Most people do not consider their future beyond the grave. They see their individual life as being finite. Interesting that, as you say, they would view the universe in terms of infinity, but life in terms of finite. Regardless, the spirit which animates this mortal flesh is immortal. The soul which contains my intelligence, my personality, my emotions. My physical body is but a window which allows it (me) to express some part of itself (myself).

That was my point :-)

You as a human being have a desire to beleive that some part of you is a constant. It is not a failing, but all humans (and all animals too, now I think of it) do not like change. We all liek security, and the idea of an eternal sprit that can never not exist gives you a sense of security that you find beneficial.

I also have a fear of change, but I rather enjoy being scared... so I find the idea that there will be a time when "I" do not exist, in any form rather exciting.

Since I believe that there will be a time when I do not exist (i.e. no sprit, no soul, no body, no mind etc), I feel that I must leave a positive impact upon this earth for future generations to benefit, and if I'm really good, to remember me by. Since it is only in the memory of others I can be immortal... at least for as long as the human race exists.

bjjones37

12-21-2004, 07:02 AM

@bloodline

I certainly cannot prove to you the existence of spirit or an afterlife. Only God can do that. And it is certainly noble to wish to leave a positive legacy for future generations. :-) But physical death is somewhat of an illusion. True death is simply separation from God. "He is not a God of the dead, but of the living."

bloodline

12-21-2004, 07:13 AM

bjjones37 wrote:
@bloodline

I certainly cannot prove to you the existence of spirit or an afterlife. Only God can do that. And it is certainly noble to wish to leave a positive legacy for future generations. :-) But physical death is somewhat of an illusion. True death is simply separation from God. "He is not a God of the dead, but of the living."

Or rather you percieve total death as an illusion, just as I can only percieve that total death is a very real reality.

I think we should probably write unprovable statements in the passive tense since they are only opinion.

bjjones37

02-02-2005, 02:56 PM

bloodline wrote:

bjjones37 wrote:
@bloodline

I certainly cannot prove to you the existence of spirit or an afterlife. Only God can do that. And it is certainly noble to wish to leave a positive legacy for future generations. :-) But physical death is somewhat of an illusion. True death is simply separation from God. "He is not a God of the dead, but of the living."

Or rather you percieve total death as an illusion, just as I can only percieve that total death is a very real reality.

I think we should probably write unprovable statements in the passive tense since they are only opinion.

You mean like in the US Declaration of Independence?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Can you prove this statement? I am not at all passive about the things I truly believe.

T_Bone

02-02-2005, 04:57 PM

FluffyMcDeath wrote:
Or are they equal?

They're both dead, and Jesus wants to go to Venus, leaving Levon far behind.

T_Bone

02-02-2005, 05:03 PM

bjjones37 wrote:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Can you prove this statement? I am not at all passive about the things I truly believe.

That's a damn good example.

Atheist

02-05-2005, 02:03 AM

bjjones37 wrote:

How many truly innocent have ever walked the face of this planet? I know of only one.

Hi bjjones37,

Not according to my count.

BTW, are angels of god and angel followers of Satan/devil/Lucifer fighting each other right now, and throughout time, to just before god made humans?

Atheist

02-05-2005, 02:27 AM

bjjones37 wrote:

It is within the forge of conflict that the steel of conviction is forged. Through suffering we learn patience. Through loss, we learn to appreciate what we have. Through the needs in our life we are forced to come to God and reason with him.

Hi bjjones37,

Ahhhh, yes but, is any of this really necessary?

Truely?

"Through suffering we learn patience."

And what exactly "suffering" awaits us in heaven?

And any other "lessons" that are bestowed upon us here on earth do we desparately have need of in heaven?

Our needs in heaven will be minute.

No laws COULD be broken.

No justice will ever be meted out, it's a "perfect" place.

In heaven, you cannot murder, steal, overeat (gluttony), despoil, suffer from "laziness", as nothing needs to be done, and practicing false worship, is theoretically all but impossible!!

Sinning in heaven should be not improbable, but impossible.

Therefore, earth is what, a clearing house? A screen test?

Well, I contend that, there ARE people that were put in impossible situations, that by their actions will be in hell, but had they been in other circumstances, would not be candidates for hell.

IOW, they were set up. And therefore, this "test" is a sham. Rigged. Any weighting against someone is unacceptable.

And this test equates to "eternity".

So, even after 8.73854 billion years of torment in the 429th level (pit) of hell, god WON'T be changing his mind about you? NOW who's extreme? Well, he has the right to be, but I think that he, having constant knowledge of the suffering of WAY MORE than half of all the souls that were created should drive him insane at some point, and HE may become EVIL, and do us ALL in!

No escaping THAT bogeyman!

the_leander

02-05-2005, 02:54 AM

Atheist wrote:

bjjones37 wrote:

How many truly innocent have ever walked the face of this planet? I know of only one.

Hi bjjones37,

Not according to my count.

Nore even according to the bible, it specificly points out that there is an age of innocence (I'm thinking pre puberty but my memory is a little shot atm). I'll ask the missus for the exact passage and where it is in the bible, she's good at that sort of thing. The one good thing about being married to a JW is that they know the bible inside out in a way that I simply haven't found in other christian groups. I just don't happen to agree with their interpritation, but its useful to have none the less.

My son was born innocent, and is still innocent, to my knolledge he has never committed any "sin" either by desire or admision of action. Unless of course you consider that being born was a sin in of itself...

Wilse

02-05-2005, 04:21 PM

@Dan:

I used to love those Gaiman comics.
I seem to remember having a weird feeling of adolescent guilt at being
vaguely attracted to the Sandman's sister (I think), since she was
only a drawing.
;-P

Wilse

02-05-2005, 04:44 PM

Jerry springer, the musical, sorted this out already. ;-)

Seriously, the God of the Christian flavour is a paranoid weirdo.
He creates Adam and Eve and then decides to 'tempt' them by letting
Satan slither up to them and have them eat from the tree.
That's like a parent telling a kid not to eat something, leaving the
room and sending in another family member to say that, actually it's
OK to eat it, just to see whether they do, then punishing them for it.

Entrapment, I think. ;-)

And i still don't know where Cain's missus bcame from.

Just as believers 'know' theres is a God and a Satan, I 'know' that
the christian varieties of these that i was told about, and taken
literally from the Bible, cannot possibly exist.

Karlos

02-06-2005, 12:37 PM

bloodline wrote:

I also have a fear of change, but I rather enjoy being scared... so I find the idea that there will be a time when "I" do not exist, in any form rather exciting.

You already are eternal in one sense. There's enough of your DNA in one sock to blast it across space towards some prebiotic planet and begin a whole new evolution :lol:

Karlos

02-06-2005, 12:43 PM

Wilse wrote:

And i still don't know where Cain's missus bcame from.

If we indulge the idea that it is both literal and correct for one moment, I see two basic possibilites:

1) Cain's missus was his sister (ick)

2) The process of "creating" people individially did not stop at Adam and Eve, and whilst unreported (by virtue of not being the first and therefore less important), a whole multitude of other individuals were made, whom subsequently procreated and provided the basic gene pool for the human race.

Or something...

cecilia

02-06-2005, 03:02 PM

Karlos wrote:

bloodline wrote:

I also have a fear of change, but I rather enjoy being scared... so I find the idea that there will be a time when "I" do not exist, in any form rather exciting.

You already are eternal in one sense. There's enough of your DNA in one sock to blast it across space towards some prebiotic planet and begin a whole new evolution :lol:i had always assumed that's how life began on THIS planet! we are all descended from a dirty sock :roflmao:

WOOT! :lol:

the_leander

02-06-2005, 03:11 PM

EEEEEEEEEEEWWWWW!

Anyone know of a technology that would allow for cleansing at the genetic level? :lol:

Atheist

02-06-2005, 04:05 PM

cecilia wrote:

Karlos wrote:

You already are eternal in one sense. There's enough of your DNA in one sock to blast it across space towards some prebiotic planet and begin a whole new evolution :lol:i had always assumed that's how life began on THIS planet! we are all descended from a dirty sock :roflmao:

WOOT! :lol:

Hi Karlos, cecilia,

So, we're the result of a litterbug alien??? Fine the {bleep}!* Oh the grief he's caused!!! :lol:

While possible, it IS, WAY MORE LIKELY, that the organic molecules happened here absolutely naturally of their own accord, because it's just what atoms do.

When every condition is ideal, given enough time, heck, maybe even only 50 years, something's going to be crawling around. (I mean floating around, microbes, of course.)

Remember, they operate fast, 1 microbe can become 2 in 20 minutes. The waste produsts are organic molecules.

If you found a lifeless planet, but it had ideal conditions FOR life, and dropped only ONE ameoba on it, how long before it becomes infested? 1 or 2 weeks? And evolution of that ameoba would be off the scale, too.

Life forms are NOT perfect replicators.

If a molecule that is absorbed is not accurate to continue living with, it still MIGHT be incorporated, hence mutation. (Then we get the X-Men movie!!!!!!!!!!!)

Life is a NATURAL PHENOMENON occurring everywhere in the galaxy, in ALL galxies, of this Universe!

Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

And god is nowhere to be found, I insist.

* No, lock him in chains, for eternity!

cecilia

02-06-2005, 04:18 PM

i agree!
it's just funny to visualize an alien wanking off and then throwing his sock onto a nearby planet. :lol:

Karlos

02-06-2005, 06:51 PM

@Atheist & Cecilia

Actually, the sock idea is not as absurd as it sounds. Well, it is, but the concept that the first life (at least as we understand it) was brought here from elsewhere (the so called Pansperma idea) is not a new one.

@Atheist

You need to read heavily into prebiotic chemistry (it was one of my masters level subjects) to know why there is absolutely bugger all chance that the biochemistry on which life as we know it depends (and which also appears to be fundamentally unchanged since day 1) arose by either the sheer chance/predisposition you suggest and especially not in the 250 million years or so timescale of "favourable conditions" that it managed to appear in.

Frankly, a rogue gene-packed sock is a lot more likely than that :lol:

Seriously, how it started is still a complete mystery and nobody working in the field will tell you otherwise, although they will confirm the near impossibility of it spontaneously occuring.

Of course, this is (and indeeed was) another topic :-D

Wilse

02-07-2005, 11:53 AM

@Karlos:

Yeah, and the possibility that she was his mother, as put forward by
mdma.

None of which leabves me any the wiser.

I heard her name was Rebecca.

Mibbe she was one of the crawly things that crawleth.
A sheep , perhaps?

bjjones37

02-08-2005, 01:08 PM

the_leander wrote:

Atheist wrote:

bjjones37 wrote:

How many truly innocent have ever walked the face of this planet? I know of only one.

Hi bjjones37,

Not according to my count.

Nore even according to the bible, it specificly points out that there is an age of innocence (I'm thinking pre puberty but my memory is a little shot atm). I'll ask the missus for the exact passage and where it is in the bible, she's good at that sort of thing. The one good thing about being married to a JW is that they know the bible inside out in a way that I simply haven't found in other christian groups. I just don't happen to agree with their interpritation, but its useful to have none the less.

My son was born innocent, and is still innocent, to my knolledge he has never committed any "sin" either by desire or admision of action. Unless of course you consider that being born was a sin in of itself...

I really do not know of any infants that "walk the face of this planet". I was making a rather literal allusion to grownups. You are correct that there is an age of innocence but it seems to be lost fairly early. I learned of the cruelty and intolerance of children when I was in first and second grade. I myself was selfish, self-centered, stubborn, and disobedient. Yes, infants and toddlers are innocent, but there is an age of accountability and I seem to have lost my innocence at a very early age - long before I was old enough to travel on my own. Oh, I was naive, but not innocent. Neither were my brothers or sisters or schoolmates that despised me. It has been a marvelous thing to grow up and find God and find the acceptance with own my wife and children that I never knew before.

BTW, it sounds like you have a son to be proud of. :-)

the_leander

02-08-2005, 02:37 PM

@bjjones37

That remains to be seen, but so far he has done nothing that would give me cause for concern. My understanding of the whole innocence thing was more about not being aware of Sex is what I got the impression of, rather then behavior in general. Though I agree, Children can be extremely cruel.

Atheist

02-22-2007, 05:28 PM

Karlos wrote:
As far as I understand the abrahamic religions, the answer is God, without question.

However, from a theological view point, perhaps the question should be, "Who is man more readily influenced by?"

Hi Karlos,

I find this a bit of an odd question, insofar as we have an innate weakness, hence, an apparent easily visible answer.

We've been cursed from day one (by god), and also from both genetic inheritance of mother and father being "unpure" by way of their consumption of fruit from the "Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil".

Since our "soul" is tainted already, we are all "sinners", we're constantly fighting NOT to be any more. Our "influence" STARTS at the hands of satan himself (being predisposed to such, from the beginning), and we're supposed to be clawing our way back toward "The Light".

Of course, the second we renounce our wickedness, and beg god's forgiveness, we immediately plummet back into the "unpure" ways, because we are STILL of ("cursed", "sinning") flesh and blood.... hence one must never ever miss a Sunday at church...

Probably muslimism is right, pray 5 times a day, every day, as you're ALWAYS in touch with (one with, "body and soul") the putrid sinning flesh and bone of us, that we are.

But I sit back and find this all amusing, being an Atheist.

odin

02-22-2007, 06:10 PM

Holy and Unholy Feces! Begone thy thread necromancer!

CannonFodder

02-22-2007, 06:11 PM

Piss off Thierry.

nadoom

02-23-2007, 04:09 AM

Since our "soul" is tainted already, we are all "sinners", we're constantly fighting NOT to be any more. Our "influence" STARTS at the hands of satan himself (being predisposed to such, from the beginning), and we're supposed to be clawing our way back toward "The Light".

That is from a christian sentric view point, not very openminded for an athiest i must say. Muslims are born without baggage of sin and are not responsible for their actions until puberty. People have a simple choice to decide to do something right or to do something wrong.

As for who is stronger, this is in no doubt from a muslim perspective since God created satan and all things the stronger entity is obvious.

Bug_racer

02-26-2007, 06:50 PM

Has anyone ever thought that there may be someone more powerful than God ?

Think of it in the context of Good and evil . What if you dont take either side ?

You have a peice of string with a start and an ending , but there is a middle

I think this middle is a basis for what you you describe a parent to 2 kids , one good one bad . The Parent is time , in time it allows some good and some bad . If there is no parent then the children will always fight . So here on earth you would be born , brought up and go to war , like a constant crusade that has no end until emerges one victor . I beleive that Armagedon is when the parent dies and the war will begin , good vs evil . My way of thinking may be flawed , but it makes more sense than just having God and Satan !

falemagn

02-26-2007, 11:56 PM

It has always been easier to destroy than to create.

It's called "entropy".

CannonFodder

02-27-2007, 07:12 AM

Bug_racer wrote:
Has anyone ever thought that there may be someone more powerful than God ?

Think of it in the context of Good and evil . What if you dont take either side ?

You have a peice of string with a start and an ending , but there is a middle

I think this middle is a basis for what you you describe a parent to 2 kids , one good one bad . The Parent is time , in time it allows some good and some bad . If there is no parent then the children will always fight . So here on earth you would be born , brought up and go to war , like a constant crusade that has no end until emerges one victor . I beleive that Armagedon is when the parent dies and the war will begin , good vs evil . My way of thinking may be flawed , but it makes more sense than just having God and Satan !

I believe "God" is the inherent goodness in the heart of mankind, and the "satan" is merely the inherent capability to do badness in the brain of mankind.

A wise man once said "He who knows himself, knows his God".

Dandy

02-28-2007, 04:11 AM

Dandy

02-28-2007, 04:21 AM

bloodline wrote:

...the Universe on the other hand has very few constants, and certainly on a macroscopic scale (eg ours) nothing is constant at all but forever changing.

I don't think this is correct.
have you taken the speed of light into account?
Or the absolute zero point of temperature?
Did the atomar stucture of e.g. an Hydrogen atom ever change since the Big Bang?

Just a few constants that immediately sprung to my mind...

Dandy

02-28-2007, 04:41 AM

bjjones37 wrote:

If a window is cracked, our perception through it will be distorted. Same if it is dirty. This is just an analogy I know. But it does clarify what I am trying to say. Say a person is in an accident and suffers brain damage. This may entail memory loss, or even loss of intellect. Does this mean he is now inferior or less of a person? I submit to you that the soul of that person is every bit as vital and valuable as it was before. It is only the "window" that is damaged. So the severely mentally retarded, or the physically incapacitated, are every bit as valuable in God's eyes as "normal" people. When they discard the mortal shell, all of these limitations will disappear.

Hmmmm - if a window is damaged, it can be replaced.
After this our perception through it will be clear again.

What do you think - would this be possible for a soul as well?

If one lived a bad life, dies and God looks at his life and comes to the conclusion that he "failed the examination" - is it thinkable that he could be given a second chance to pass the examination (provided that he realised he did everything wrong during his first life in the meantime) - maybe by being born annother time?

What do the religions say on this?
I cannot remember having heard/read anything on this - neither from Christian religion, nor from Muslim religion.

Could it be possible that an fu**ing a**hole like Adolf Hitler could be given a second chance to prove that he can be a good soul?

motorollin

02-28-2007, 06:54 AM

Dandy wrote:
bloodline wrote:
...the Universe on the other hand has very few constants, and certainly on a macroscopic scale (eg ours) nothing is constant at all but forever changing.
I don't think this is correct.
have you taken the speed of light into account?
I have to be pedantic here and point out that the speed of light is not constant. It varies depending on the substance through which the light is travelling (if any).

--
moto

pixie

02-28-2007, 01:18 PM

Could it be possible that an fu**ing a**hole like Adolf Hitler could be given a second chance to prove that he can be a good soul?
Is known that Hitler is God's son, and also about the inconditional love that only God posess for all there is... is scale reason enough to set him apart from what nature? Wasn't him allowed to do it in the first place by God himself? Did you saw God interfeer? Also, had Hitler done it all by himself? Do you release others from having doing it and sharing Hitler's thoughts? Releasing them from having a brain of their own?

I believe that if there's someone who understand not only Hitler but all POV is God, and as such prone to forgive him as all of us... if there is a reason for forgivness, that is...

Bug_racer

02-28-2007, 02:45 PM

Could it be possible that an fu**ing a**hole like Adolf Hitler could be given a second chance to prove that he can be a good soul?

I always wonder why people go straight for Hitler in terms of being a bad soul / evil man etc . The Soviet Empire under Stalin massacred more people , and then the Japanese who occupied China massacred even more .

Also it was the Brits who created the first concentration camps , not the Germans so does that make someone from the UK more likely to have a bad soul ?

pixie

02-28-2007, 06:59 PM

Which is stronger your arm or your forearm?

pixie

03-01-2007, 02:28 AM

> I always wonder why people go straight for Hitler in terms
> of being a bad soul / evil man etc . The Soviet Empire under
> Stalin massacred more people , and then the Japanese who
> occupied China massacred even more .

On how Jews were deceived might be one of the reasons, on how they were being eliminated...

Bug_racer

03-01-2007, 03:55 AM

pixie wrote:
> I always wonder why people go straight for Hitler in terms
> of being a bad soul / evil man etc . The Soviet Empire under
> Stalin massacred more people , and then the Japanese who
> occupied China massacred even more .

On how Jews were deceived might be one of the reasons, on how they were being eliminated...

But thats basically making the claim of Hitler knowing that this was happening . Reinhard Hydrich was in charge of the extermination camps and also Adolf Eichman . Hitler had little to do with them

odin

03-01-2007, 05:49 AM

Oh come on, you're telling me the headhoncho of Das Dritte Reich wasn't briefed on an operation of that scale? Why is it you get all defensive when someone merely mentioned Hitler as an example. Although yes, he's pretty much THE example of evil in modern Western society. Blame the fact that under his supervision Western-Europe endured a whole bunch of crappy years.

I'm sure that someone from South-Asia probably wouldn't name Hitler as no. 1 example of evil and also, it's the victors who write the historybooks.

Bug_racer

03-01-2007, 06:02 AM

Sure he probably was briefed but it was of little importance to him , especially later when they were loosing the war .
The whole notion of Hitler being THE example of evil in modern western europe is all part of the usual victor controls the media and reflection of the way the war was fought . He probably knew , but it was definately not his number 1 priority .

odin wrote:
Oh come on, you're telling me the headhoncho of Das Dritte Reich wasn't briefed on an operation of that scale? Why is it you get all defensive when someone merely mentioned Hitler as an example. Although yes, he's pretty much THE example of evil in modern Western society. Blame the fact that under his supervision Western-Europe endured a whole bunch of crappy years.

I'm sure that someone from South-Asia probably wouldn't name Hitler as no. 1 example of evil.

odin

03-01-2007, 06:25 AM

Doesn't change the fact that he was an evil {bleep}. Even if you are right and he thought the Holocaust was of 'little importance' it says enough. Ofcourse there's also the 'little' thing of waltzing all over Europe enslaving the civilian, or do you also think that was orchestrated by spin doctors and Mr. Hitler didn't have anything to do with it?

Wilse

03-01-2007, 08:47 AM

odin wrote:
Holy and Unholy Feces! Begone thy thread necromancer!

:roflmao:

Brilliant!

:pint:

pixie

03-01-2007, 01:04 PM

Hitler the Evil? As much as the very next person doing his commands without questioning... you give him too credit for

Dandy

03-04-2007, 05:17 AM

Bug_racer wrote:

pixie wrote:

> I always wonder why people go straight for Hitler in terms
> of being a bad soul / evil man etc. The Soviet Empire under
> Stalin massacred more people, and then the Japanese who
> occupied China massacred even more.

On how Jews were deceived might be one of the reasons, on how they were being eliminated...

But thats basically making the claim of Hitler knowing that this was happening .

He DID know it was happening - HE gave the order!

O.K. - he didn`t bother with the details - he ordered Göring to take care of that, and Göring ordered Heydrich ( Carta Göring (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Carta_G%C3%B6ring.JPG) ) on July 6th, 1941, who organized "the Wannsee Conference".

Already in his book "Mein Kampf" (first published in July 1925) Hitler propagated ideas that were aiming at the
annihilation of the Jews.

Bug_racer wrote:

Reinhard Hydrich was in charge of the extermination camps and also Adolf Eichman . Hitler had little to do with them

...except that he gave the order, which finally involved them.

Maybe "gave the order" is not the correct term, but his book "Mein Kampf" - including his anti-semitic ideas - served as source for the program of the "National Sozialistische Deutsche Arbeiter Partei (NSDAP)", of which he was the "only & allmighty" "Führer (leader)".

So I would say there is a logical chain of evidences pointing to him as originator of the holocaust.

Or what do you think was the reason that he finally shot himself in the head and took potassium cyanide?

He very well knew his role in this "game" and wanted to avoid being made responsible for what he did...