Is Satan really the bad guy in the bible?

[Seppuku]

No, you're not trying to be nuts.  You're trying to force me to choose.  Is that not why you post?   To wring an answer out so you can say "ha! there it is!"?

Or it could be because belief is binary. If you are not a theist then you are an atheist and if you are not an atheist then you are a theist.

How?

Simple. ALL an atheist is, is somebody who ISN'T a theist. There's different kinds of atheists, for example you could be an agnostic atheist or a gnostic atheist, but the fact remains, if you do not believe in any deities (and therefore, you are not a theist) then it makes you an atheist. I see agnostics saying, "I am neither a theist or an atheist, I am in the middle because I simply do not know the answers", when posed with the question, "do you believe in any deities?" their answer is normally 'no', at least in my experience. That makes them an agnostic atheist, which is exactly what I am. I know some folks don't like to call themselves atheists because it comes off as more provocative, but it isn't actually something to provoke anybody, it's just people choose to see it that way.

Atheist = not theist.

Definitions:
Theist = a person who believes in one or more deities.
Atheist = a person who does not believe in any deities.

Even if your belief in a deity is so, so, so, so small then you're still an theist.
Even if you think that there's a lot of credibility to the theist argument, but do not know if they're true and hold back from being a theist, then you are still an atheist.

It is a paradox to say "I am not a theist" and "I am not an atheist".
Because that is like saying:
"I do believe God and I don't believe in God"

How can something be true and false at the same time?

Of course, a person is capable of not knowing what they actually believe, but they can find out with close scrutiny.

[darkdragon46]

How can something be true and false at the same time?

That is the question that you have to answer in order to 'get' religion.

[Seppuku]

So basically, religion is just a paradox.

Why not just accept the term 'atheist' if you don't believe in any deities?

[darkdragon46]

So basically, religion is just a paradox.

Why not just accept the term 'atheist' if you don't believe in any deities?

Because both atheist and theist do not describe what I am.

[screwtape]

Because both atheist and theist do not describe what I am.

How about "preganant" or "not pregnant"?

It is one or the other.  There are no third options.

[Seppuku]

So basically, religion is just a paradox.

Why not just accept the term 'atheist' if you don't believe in any deities?

Because both atheist and theist do not describe what I am.

You've said that already. Perhaps you could show me how my response is wrong and say where your stance fits in so I can understand your thinking? Because at the moment, with how 'theist' and 'atheist' are defined to say you are neither is a paradox, just as Screwtape puts it, being pregnant and no pregnant. Belief is binary, you do or you don't, there is no middle ground, there's uncertainty but uncertainty itself is not a middle ground.

[darkdragon46]

So basically, religion is just a paradox.

Why not just accept the term 'atheist' if you don't believe in any deities?

Because both atheist and theist do not describe what I am.

You've said that already. Perhaps you could show me how my response is wrong and say where your stance fits in so I can understand your thinking? Because at the moment, with how 'theist' and 'atheist' are defined to say you are neither is a paradox, just as Screwtape puts it, being pregnant and no pregnant. Belief is binary, you do or you don't, there is no middle ground, there's uncertainty but uncertainty itself is not a middle ground.

As I said, I agree that belief is binary.

Essentially, theist and atheist are the same thing, which is what religion helps you deal with.  Making a distinction between two things that are the same is meaningless.  I am not either.

[Garja]

Theist and atheist are the same thing?  News to me.

[Seppuku]

Essentially, theist and atheist are the same thing, which is what religion helps you deal with.  Making a distinction between two things that are the same is meaningless.  I am not either.

Explain.

Because as far as I understand the two are not the same. The term terms are very simply defined as:

Theist - Somebody who believes in one or more deities.
Atheist - Somebody who does not believe in any deities.

As you agree belief is binary a theist is 'belief' or '1' and an atheist is 'no-belief' or '0'. You're either '1' or you're '0'.

Perhaps you define atheism differently, perhaps you add all of the associations that come with it? The evolution, the science, the secular humanism. At least this is the only way I can think somebody could deny being both. But 'theist' and 'atheist' describe something very basic, the associations mean nothing to them, a Christian is a theist, but there are theists who have completely different ideas that varies themselves greatly from the other, heck, there's even such thing as a non-religious theist. The same token applies to atheism, and you can even have a religious atheist, because Buddhism has no deities, whilst some acquire gods from other religions or even deify Buddha, but not everybody does and those who don't are technically speaking, atheists. I am a philosophical Buddhist, basically Buddhism without the woo, which sets me apart from many of your typical atheists, who are secular humanists, like Richard Dawkins.

[darkdragon46]

Explain.

Because as far as I understand the two are not the same. The term terms are very simply defined as:

Theist - Somebody who believes in one or more deities.
Atheist - Somebody who does not believe in any deities.

If I ask an atheist to define God (the christian one, because that is probably most familiar), they would give a very similar answer as a theist.  The understanding of God is the same in both cases, one side simply says it is not worth the effort to put up with.

[Dante]

If I ask an atheist to define God (the christian one, because that is probably most familiar), they would give a very similar answer as a theist.  The understanding of God is the same in both cases, one side simply says it is not worth the effort to put up with.

Are you dodging and making shit up on purpose? It's highly annoying, and doesn't move the conversation along.

These people aren't talking about your definitions of god. Nor are they talking about putting up with god.

They're asking if you believe in gods. It's a yes or no question.

Do you believe god (any god) exists?

[Seppuku]

Explain.

Because as far as I understand the two are not the same. The term terms are very simply defined as:

Theist - Somebody who believes in one or more deities.
Atheist - Somebody who does not believe in any deities.

If I ask an atheist to define God (the christian one, because that is probably most familiar), they would give a very similar answer as a theist.  The understanding of God is the same in both cases, one side simply says it is not worth the effort to put up with.

This doesn't actually answer anything. If asked about the Christian god, I would offer a Christian definition, well I might actually ask which version of the Christian god you want me to define, because there are many.

But I am not talking about any one specific definition of a god. I am talking about all types of deities out there, from those believed by monotheists like Christians to the polytheists of paganism to even what deists believe. Basically EVERY type of deity. Even ones I do not know about. You seem to be hinting at a definition but you make no effort to explain it, but seem to try and convince us we're wrong about the 'theist' and 'atheist' distinction and that neither apply to you without actually telling us why it's wrong.

But at the end of the day, and you agree, belief is binary. An atheist is very simply "not a theist". The 'a' in the 'atheist' works exactly like a '!' in C programming, in C programming '!' means 'not'. So you could have "If (DoorNumber != 4)", which means, "If DoorNumber isn't 4", or "If (!Locked)" it's a boolean statement that means it's not locked, so it's unlocked. Gnostic is another word like this, gnostic is about knowledge, hence an agnostic is somebody without knowledge, hence the distinction between an agnostic atheist and a gnostic atheist.

As belief is binary you either:
Believe in the existence of at least one deity
Or you don't.

As we keep saying 'belief is binary', so lets use binary:
Theist = '1'
Atheist = '0'.

So are you are '1' or are you a '0'?

[darkdragon46]

Are you dodging and making shit up on purpose? It's highly annoying, and doesn't move the conversation along.

These people aren't talking about your definitions of god. Nor are they talking about putting up with god.

They're asking if you believe in gods. It's a yes or no question.

Do you believe god (any god) exists?

And as I've said (or at least alluded to), the question is irrelevant.  And no, I'm not making shit up.  The term 'put up with' is merely referring to the fact that they don't believe in gods.  Still, there are the same as theists.  And if you speak of God, you automatically bring in your understanding of God.  You cannot separate the two. 

[darkdragon46]

As we keep saying 'belief is binary', so lets use binary:
Theist = '1'
Atheist = '0'.

So are you are '1' or are you a '0'?

I will compare this to something you do understand.  I say you can either be believe in science (1) or not believe in science (0).

So are you (1) or (0)?

It is a nonsense question.  Whether you believe in science or not, it still is, yes?

[Seppuku]

It's not a nonsense question, there are many who do not believe in science, they think science is a load of hooha. Science may still 'be', but a person may not believe and if you're discussing beliefs it is not a nonsense question because the question can determine whether or not I consider science to be 'true'. If talking about science itself, then you probably wouldn't need to ask me that question. To answer, I am a 1.

However, you made the claim that you are neither a theist or an atheist, now I am trying to understand how that is possible because by my understanding that is a paradox, you've agreed belief is binary so it ought to mean you accept that it is paradox, so my questions about your position are not nonsensical because I want to know and understand your position, yet you're doing everything you can to avoid giving an answer, which is actually pretty frustrating. A god may or may not exist and whether or not we believe in it may not matter to the reality of the issue, but the fact remains people believe or don't believe and it's not an unreasonable question to ask where a person stands on that issue.

So are you going to give me a straight answer or are you going to run me in circles? You claim you're neither an atheist or a theist, so it might be a good idea to explain how you can be neither, then I can better understand your position. You agreed belief is binary so that can only lead me to assume my definitions are inaccurate, they're based off of dictionary definitions and I've made reference to the etymology too in how I've defined them (with the meaning of the prefix a-) and it's also based off of how I define myself as an atheist and terms I've found many atheists & theists I've spoken to accept and it's also how I learned them at school but I am open minded and willing to accept new evidence, I am not an ignorant person and I don't stand around with my fingers in my ears screaming 'lalalala', so try me.

[Dante]

Are you dodging and making shit up on purpose? It's highly annoying, and doesn't move the conversation along.

These people aren't talking about your definitions of god. Nor are they talking about putting up with god.

They're asking if you believe in gods. It's a yes or no question.

Do you believe god (any god) exists?

And as I've said (or at least alluded to), the question is irrelevant.  And no, I'm not making shit up.  The term 'put up with' is merely referring to the fact that they don't believe in gods.  Still, there are the same as theists.  And if you speak of God, you automatically bring in your understanding of God.  You cannot separate the two.

Bullshit. You're dodging. Reported. Have a wonderful day.

[naemhni]

And as I've said (or at least alluded to), the question is irrelevant.  And no, I'm not making shit up.  The term 'put up with' is merely referring to the fact that they don't believe in gods.  Still, there are the same as theists.  And if you speak of God, you automatically bring in your understanding of God.  You cannot separate the two.

Bullshit. You're dodging. Reported. Have a wonderful day.

DarkDragon46, you've been asked whether you're a believer, and you've essentially responded by saying, "I am both, and neither".  That might make for a good episode of Star Trek, but it isn't going to fly at WWGHA.

It's been explained to you that belief is an either/or proposition: you either believe, or you don't.  Please either answer the question or explain how you reject the binarism.  Talking like the Guardian of Forever is just dodging, and that's not permitted here.

[darkdragon46]

DarkDragon46, you've been asked whether you're a believer, and you've essentially responded by saying, "I am both, and neither".  That might make for a good episode of Star Trek, but it isn't going to fly at WWGHA.

It's been explained to you that belief is an either/or proposition: you either believe, or you don't.  Please either answer the question or explain how you reject the binarism.  Talking like the Guardian of Forever is just dodging, and that's not permitted here.

I have been trying to explain why I reject binarism.  Religion is not binary. Belief in religion is.  The problem is, religion affects you whether you believe it or not, just like gravity.  So why would I waste m time answering a pointless question of belief when I have to deal with it anyway? 

[Dante]

DarkDragon46, you've been asked whether you're a believer, and you've essentially responded by saying, "I am both, and neither".  That might make for a good episode of Star Trek, but it isn't going to fly at WWGHA.

It's been explained to you that belief is an either/or proposition: you either believe, or you don't.  Please either answer the question or explain how you reject the binarism.  Talking like the Guardian of Forever is just dodging, and that's not permitted here.

I have been trying to explain why I reject binarism.  Religion is not binary. Belief in religion is.  The problem is, religion affects you whether you believe it or not, just like gravity.  So why would I waste m time answering a pointless question of belief when I have to deal with it anyway?

Wierd. I don't recall anyone asking you if you thought religion was real.

Let's assume that you're being honest. Yes, religion affects everyone, regardless of our beliefs. Because, religion is real.

The question to you is; Does god affect everyone? Is god real?

Yes or no?

[Seppuku]

DarkDragon46, you've been asked whether you're a believer, and you've essentially responded by saying, "I am both, and neither".  That might make for a good episode of Star Trek, but it isn't going to fly at WWGHA.

It's been explained to you that belief is an either/or proposition: you either believe, or you don't.  Please either answer the question or explain how you reject the binarism.  Talking like the Guardian of Forever is just dodging, and that's not permitted here.

I have been trying to explain why I reject binarism.  Religion is not binary. Belief in religion is.  The problem is, religion affects you whether you believe it or not, just like gravity.  So why would I waste m time answering a pointless question of belief when I have to deal with it anyway?

But we were talking about belief in deities, in fact, I don't think I could have made it any clearer - I have even made this point over and over. Whether religion is real or not is irrelevant to what I am asking.

Using your own example if you ask if I believe in science, whether science is true or false is irrelevent to the question because you're asking what I believe or don't believe. The validity of science is NOT a part of the question.

You can be a theist and irreligious[1]  and you can be an atheist but be religious[2]. So religion is out of the equation here. We're talking about BELIEF and DEITIES. Not truth and religion.

We're asking specifically about your BELIEFS. The fact you say you're neither an atheist nor a theist, I wanted clarification, especially now as you've agreed belief is binary. Perhaps you don't want to associate yourself with the connotations that come with the two? Or maybe you misunderstood the terms and are avoiding having to admit that. I don't know why you're avoiding the answer, I wouldn't think you have anything to hide...and if you didn't want to answer the question I'd just expect a "I don't want to answer that".

It's like talking to a politician who doesn't want to answer the question, yet wants to convince us that they're giving answers.

Perhaps you could give a straight answer and we can stop running around in circles and we can forget this. The forum doesn't take kindly to dodging tactics.

1.	Like many deists and pantheists.
2.	Like many Buddhists.

[darkdragon46]

It's like talking to a politician who doesn't want to answer the question, yet wants to convince us that they're giving answers.

Perhaps you could give a straight answer and we can stop running around in circles and we can forget this. The forum doesn't take kindly to dodging tactics.

I have explained why I think whether I believe one thing or another doesn't really matter.

Essentially, you are asking me a question that has no meaning, so I will not answer it.  Apparently it has meaning to you, otherwise you would not be asking it.  I'd like to know that if atheist and theist have nothing to do with religion, then why do you care, if we are having this discussion in the context of religion?

So, since the question is irrelevant, I'll say I'm  atheist.  In ten minutes, I might be theist.  It all depends on if I want to leave out an extra letter.

[Graybeard]

I have explained why I think whether I believe one thing or another doesn't really matter.

Maybe, but that's your opinion - I think you're wrong and it does matter.

Essentially, you are asking me a question that has no meaning, so I will not answer it.  Apparently it has meaning to you, otherwise you would not be asking it.

So had it got meaning or not?

So, since the question is irrelevant, I'll say I'm  atheist.  In ten minutes, I might be theist.  It all depends on if I want to leave out an extra letter.

Has anyone mentioned to you that you seem to be mentally abnormal? Is it OCD?

Ooo look! There's a squirrel!

darkdragon46,
(i) Just answer the questions and we will answer yours
(ii) Stop being a pretentious asshole - OK?

Or is that too complicated?

[Seppuku]

I'd like to know that if atheist and theist have nothing to do with religion, then why do you care, if we are having this discussion in the context of religion?

Because this site is about the discussion of 'God', the Christian deity. Discussions extend beyond that and theism and atheism often come into play.

However, our little discussion here? Nothing to do with religion. You said you are NEITHER an atheist or a theist. So you've made a positive statement here, but you've not really justifified it and I am looking for that justification. All of your answers are incredibly vague and have a certain mysticism. You've said you're an atheist but could be a theist in 10 minutes, without an actual explanation this isn't an answer. It doesn't explain how you can neither be an atheist nor a theist, it's actually contraditory because what you're essentially saying is your belief changes and is inconsistent, that's not being neither of the two, it's being one some of the time and the other the rest of the time.

It comes down to something very simple:

You made a positive statement.
I am looking for justification to understand it.

You claimed to be neither atheist or theist.
I've given all my backup as to why that's not possible. The logic, you pretty much agree with.

You shift the goalpost by trying to make the question irrelevent or not of importance.
I try to get you to give a straight answer on your paradox. It's relevent because we're talking about it, it's important because you made the statement.

You now say you'll say atheist but may change in 10 minutes.
This is another positive statement, again without any clarification or justification. Like all your previous statements it is met with a mystical tone and a general vagueness.


How does your non theism/atheism position work? How do you manage to consistently change your beliefs in what is seemingly at random. You chose to use the words "It all depends on if I want to leave out an extra letter", implying you're choosing your beliefs. But this does not explain how you can be neither when it's just you're either based on choice? Why is it based on choice? This is a very peculiar stance, if explained it would make conversing with you a lot easier. We are on a discussion board after all, if we can't understand what you're on about, then how are we going to find a common ground for discussing these kinds of topics?

[Lectus]

I was talking to a Christian about Lucifer:

Christian: Lucifer rebelled against God.
Me: If Lucifer was a creation of God and Lucifer represents all evil, then God isn't perfect and good.
Christian: It's free will!
Me: Ok. Does God have free will?
Christian: Yes, He is God!
Me: Ok, so are you saying to me that God can do evil?

Christian's face: 

[harbinger77]

While thinking about arguments to post here http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,23650.29.html I decided to google  the phrase in the title to see if I could find any text on this subject.

I found this cool text: http://daltonator.net/durandal/religion/satan.shtml

This gives food for though.

Satan is always portrayed as the bad guy, the root of all evil. Yet the references of him doing bad things in the bible itself don't exist.

People just assume he's bad. But he could just be a popular leader trying to save people from dictatorship.

This makes the bible severely flawed in its sense of justice. You just take a martyr to persuade people into fear and obedience and then you claim you love all.

IWhat are your thoughts?

Having not read more than the OP I'm not sure if there are any theist debating this topic. Not even sure my point is new.

My point is not to debate. Just want to point out that the idea is not new. Through my research on various religions I discovered this long ago. People do worship Lucifer. yes the devil as the actual good guy. They claim as you say. In the garden of eden Lucifer was trying to liberate man from God's oppression. Thus making him the good one.

 Especially in my pre-christian years I read about all kinds of different religions. from the point of the people holding such views. I assure you this is not Christian bias.

[Traveler]

This thread is over a year old. Thread necromancy is frowned upon ... it would be better to start a new thread if you want to discuss this.

[harbinger77]

no thanks.. not a topic I wish to debate... just adding my two cents. I couldn't leave this alone so I looked it up. I was correct it's Satanism that holds this teaching. After reading some of these posts. I thought some of these people could be quoting right from the book if i didn't know any better. Kind of creepy... Food for thought.

The Satanic Bible....
The Book of Lucifer contains the majority of the philosophy of The Satanic Bible . It details how
Christianity has taught that God is good and Satan is evil, [48] and presents an alternate view. It
describes that the concept of Satan, used synonymously with "God", is different to each LaVeyan Satanist, but that to all it represents a good and steadying force in his or her life.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Satanic_Bible

[GabrielGnosi]

The OP is right about at least one thing.

Satan was not that bad, specially when compared with God.

Here goes:

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com.br/2009/01/who-has-killed-more-satan-or-god.html

[Nudawn11]

The OP is right about at least one thing.

Satan was not that bad, specially when compared with God.

Here goes:

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com.br/2009/01/who-has-killed-more-satan-or-god.html

And the best comment on that blog came as: 
"Maybe Satan has killed more, he just didn't brag about it in a book.
Bragging is a sure-sign of low self-esteem, God."