Why is satan the bad guy?

[Skavau]

Being overly judgmental is not a good thing, Christians shouldn't be arrogant, we should be humble.

There's nothing controversial or overly judgmental about critiquing the viewpoint of an individual that endorses the torture of people.

 

[rockytopva]

oops! Wrong thread!http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjD54BGFTzs

 

[Aldebaran]

I'm sorry. Animals don't talk, people don't turn into salt, dead people don't come back to life and people don't live in fish. What is there to consider?

Maybe you should be a little more open-minded to the possibilities. Local Man Alive After Being Swallowed by Whale at Shedd Aquarium | Rock City Times

 

[TheStraightener]

Wow Aldebaran, I really hope your joking... Or you've just proved that you'll believe absolutely anything.

 

[Aldebaran]

Wow. I really hope your joking... Or you've just proved that you'll believe absolutely anything.

Ooops! Hahahaha! Wrong link! Here's the correct one: PSCF December 1991 A Whale of a Tale: Fundamentalist Fish Stories by Edward B. Davis

 

[TheStraightener]

It's urban legend.

There are also many reports out there that point to it being fake

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/n/newjonah.htm#.VAiwOXlwYm8


Never take anything on face value. It only takes two minutes to research something like this.

 

[Aldebaran]

It's urban legend.

There are also many reports out there that point to it being fake

Modern day Jonah swallowed by a whale-Fiction!


Never take anything on face value. It only takes two minutes to research something like this.

You know, even if this didn't happen a second time, it doesn't mean it never happened. Same goes for the flood of Noah. It didn't happen a second time, but it doesn't mean it didn't happen the first time either. Same with the creation of the universe.

Some things are just miraculous. Many things described in the bible are miraculous, which made them noteworthy enough to record them. Other things recorded there are not miraculous at all, which I'm sure makes those things easier for athiests to accept, which makes me wonder why they can accept those things, but not the rest.

 

[TheStraightener]

What you've done not once, but twice in quick succession is post something you believe to be evidence to support your position.

You also didn't even bother to thoroughly read each article because both of them include information that the tales are false... But you went right ahead and just believed on face value and trotted it right out there.

When does faith become gullibility?

 

[Aldebaran]

What you've done not once, but twice in quick succession is post something you believe to be evidence to support your position.

You also didn't even bother to thoroughly read each article because both of them include information that the tales are false... But you went right ahead and just believed on face value and trotted it right out there.

When does faith become gullibility?

I don't place my faith in news articles. I put it in God, who has told us His truth in his word.

 

[TheStraightener]

You know, even if this didn't happen a second time, it doesn't mean it never happened. Same goes for the flood of Noah. It didn't happen a second time, but it doesn't mean it didn't happen the first time either. Same with the creation of the universe.

Some things are just miraculous. Many things described in the bible are miraculous, which made them noteworthy enough to record them. Other things recorded there are not miraculous at all, which I'm sure makes those things easier for athiests to accept, which makes me wonder why they can accept those things, but not the rest.

Because extraordanary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I don't believe in anything supernatural. Because they are bold claims with nothing to back it up. Give me some hard evidence of miracles and I'll probably believe. That's the barrier between atheists and theists.... Evidence (or the lack of)

 

[TheStraightener]

I don't place my faith in news articles.

No, you just trot them out, with no research, to support your postion.. while at the same time proving that you'll blindly believe absolutely anything if it fits in with what you want to believe

 

[Aldebaran]

Because extraordanary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I don't believe in anything supernatural. Because they are bold claims with nothing to back it up. Give me some hard evidence of miracles and I'll probably believe. That's the barrier between atheists and theists.... Evidence (or the lack of)

And that's really the pity of it. Imagine just for a minute that God really does exist, and that He can do things that defy the laws of nature. Of course, there's not going to be any way of substantiating claims that those things happened because that would require natural thinking and reasoning. See the difference? Natural and supernatural. One cannot prove the other. They stand alone, unless a crossover happens between them, in which case you have a miracle.

So does that mean God doesn't exist in truth?

 

[Blessedj01]

Too much for you then, does it require too much thought?

Does Jesus require too much thought?

 

[Blessedj01]

See, this is the problem. Merely defining him as the bad guy is not a valid argument. Look at Star Wars. Darth Vader is not merely defined as the bad guy. Anyone who watches the movie without knowing anything about the story can present a valid argument for why he is the bad guy. And in that argument, they will be pointing to his action, decisions and motives. The argument will not state "he's the bad guy because Obi Wan or Yoda say so" or "because that's what George Lucal decided". Why can't the same be done with Satan and the bible? Or at least, why do people fail to present such an argument? Did you know that in plenty of cultures, dragons are not the bad guys at all? No, that's not the case at all. To give an extreme example.... the story of Nazi Germany and WW2 is very real. Suppose that in 2000 years, the only source of information on Nazi's is a Nazi propaganda book. That doesn't mean that the existence of the story as presented in the book means that the Nazi's were the good guys. The reality of events presented in a story is not the same as the ethical and moral implications of those events. Certainly, a distinction should be made if we are going to try to objectively evaluate the ethical and moral implications of the story. The "objective" part means that you should read the story while filtering out the bias of the author. I could, for example, write a piece about Ted Bundy in such a way that I present him as a victim who isn't as evil as his actions make him look. And in fact add sentiments that somehow, in some mysterious way, his actions were done with the best intentions. You would need to make a distinction between his objective factual actions and my mere opinion about them. No, it's not. Suppose my parents are deeply racist people. As I grow up, I start to realise that and at 15 years old, I rebel against them. At this point, I'm not telling them "i wish I was never born!!". Instead, I'm just standing up for what I consider to be a right cause. Knowing very well that I will be punished by them for it. I might get grounded, I might even be kicked out of the house. Authority and might does not make right. I'm not looking for a solution, because I consider the thing to be a non-existing problem. All I'm saying is that I do not see any valid reason to simply "assume" that god is moral just because the book claims it. God is not moral just because he is all-powerfull or all - knowing or whatever. It seems to me that every theist rejects at face-value the idea that an omnipotent creator of the universe is capable of being an evil douchebag. And I can't understand why. You are again going purely by definitions. What does it mean to say "god is love"? Love is an emotion. Do you mean to say that "god is loving"? How do you know this? And does it make sense? For example, I love my children and I assume you do to. Ask yourself, is there anything your children could do that would make you send them to a torture chamber for only a week - let alone an eternity? Your "loving" god does exactly that for something even as trivial as "not loving him back". Actually, my personal opinion on the story is that god is not just a little bit evil. The story as I understand it shows a petty, self-obsesses, jealous monsterous dictator who pushed the wrong buttons on one of his army officers, who then rebelled against them - even knowing full well that it would not turn out good for him. If we transpose this story to any other context, Satan would be called a martyr and a hero. But off course in my worldview, might does not make right. One does not follow from the other. Once again, might does not make right.

You've been given enough information by now. And sorry, I don't have time to reply to all of what you've said. I think you're starting to make completely baseless analogies. Satan is the bad guy because he preys on the innocent and seeked to destroy God, the protector of the innocent. That's all you need to define him as bad.

Maybe you need to think about where your dragon imagery and made up religion is taking you.

 

[poolerboy0077]

No, you just trot them out, with no research, to support your postion.. while at the same time proving that you'll blindly believe absolutely anything if it fits in with what you want to believe

rofl

 

[TheStraightener]

You've been given enough information by now. And sorry, I don't have time to reply to all of what you've said. I think you're starting to make completely baseless analogies. Satan is the bad guy because he preys on the innocent and seeked to destroy God, the protector of the innocent. That's all you need to define him as bad.

Maybe you need to think about where your dragon imagery and made up religion is taking you.

With a body count of over 2 million In the bible (and that's not including the flood), I would hardly call God a 'Protector of the Innocent'

 

[appleofhiseye]

With a body count of over 2 million In the bible (and that's not including the flood), I would hardly call God a 'Protector of the Innocent'

Haven't you heard? 'cause of satan everyone on earth is viewed as rebellious and corrupt, none are innocent.

 

[Blessedj01]

With a body count of over 2 million In the bible (and that's not including the flood), I would hardly call God a 'Protector of the Innocent'

Death entered the world because of SIN, not because of God!

 

[CabVet]

Death entered the world because of SIN, not because of God!

Yeah, and God didn't know that would happen, right?

 

[TheStraightener]

Haven't you heard? 'cause of satan everyone on earth is viewed as rebellious and corrupt, none are innocent.

Yeah all those babies that were killed by God's command were so rebellious and corrupt