"Do you think I care for you so little that betraying me would make a difference?"

[DetlefK]

- "You betrayed me. You betrayed my trust, you betrayed our friendship, you betrayed everything I've ever stood for and YOU LET ME DOWN."

- "Then why are you helping me?"

- "Why? Do you think I care for you so little that betraying me would make a difference?"

This right there.

This is perhaps the most damning statement I have ever read.

In medieval times, writing a play with this sentence in it would have condemned you straight to the pyre for heresy. Do you understand how truly outrageous, dangerous, offensive and heretical this sentence is?

According to the Bible, the ever-loving God cast mankind out from paradise because of the primordial sin. And yet, here is a character in a story, showing a degree of love and caring and nobility that is superior to God.

Mankind is capable of forgiving the most horrible sin: betrayal. God is not.



THIS right here, this very sentence, reveals the hollow lie at the center of the christian religion.

Eve eats of the forbidden fruit. Her punishment reveals what a character this ever-loving, eternal, unchanging, omnipotent, omniscient God is. It's a test of character. And he failed.

Lucifer refused to accept God as his master. His punishment reveals what a character this ever-loving, eternal, unchanging, omnipotent, omniscient God is. It's a test of character. And he failed.

[TalenaGor]

1. well God would have had to have known that Lucifer would do that

When he created him...... Which means by definition he created him for that purpose.....


Gah.... Don't get me started lol it's all such crazy bs lol

[PJMcK]

3. Spins your head, does it?

Iron Age mythology should have no place in a 21st century world.

[TalenaGor]

4. seriously....ffs... I told someone I my theory on how we got Jesus....

I think Mary and Joseph were having out-of-wedlock sex, she got pregnant, she didn't want to be stoned to death obviously so they made up a story and took off..... They had to maintain that story for their entire lives..... So when the baby was born he was raised believing he was the son of a deity.... And he behaved that way..... Until somebody decided they had enough....

[PJMcK]

2. The god of the Old Testament is a pretty crappy dude

It's an angry, jealous and petty god who kills indiscriminately and destroys its own creations.

The New Testament version isn't much better. Consider that he condemns his own "son" to be tortured and executed, (thanks, Dad). Strangely, the Triune God has a father, son and holy ghost as its components so its behavior is sadistic and masochistic at the same time!

By the way, if this god is all-powerful, why couldn't it just forgive humans for sinning? Why couldn't the sin simply be eliminated? That would be real power. The convoluted process of Jesus' life and seeking forgiveness is just far too complicated and intricate with too many interlocutors. If this god is omnipotent, why did it create humans in the first place?

It's all just made up silliness.

[Act_of_Reparation]

12. The God of the New Testament isn't remarkably better.

Instead of smiting your ass with extreme prejudice, he waits for you to die and then tortures for you eternity.

[PJMcK]

27. Not quite

The New Testament god waits for you to die, then passes the eternal torturing off to a third party. This all-powerful god can't even do the dirty work itself. How cowardly. Meanwhile, up in heaven, this god basks in the eternal worshipping of itself. (By the way. who does that remind you of?)

And what of the "good" that its followers have done in this god's name? Many so-called holy wars with millions of deaths throughout history. The Inquisition. Attacks against abortion doctors, (remember that abortion has been legal in the U.S. since the 1970s). Child sexual abuse by the anointed representatives of this god. The list of atrocities is endless.

An omnipotent, omniscient god who was full of love and compassion would never allow the millions of acts of barbarism in its name.

It's all a sham.

[dawg day]

5. Now from those of us humans who are less goodly--

"Who'll keep loving you when you been runnin' around?
God will, but I won't... that's the difference between God and me."

Love this song.

[guillaumeb]

6. Lucifer tried to replace the Creator.

Pride was the issue.

[Voltaire2]

7. Which section of your holy book described

these events?

[NeoGreen]

8. Are they to be believed...

Last edited Mon Jul 29, 2019, 10:09 PM - Edit history (1)

...literally?

[Voltaire2]

9. As far as I know they aren't described at all

in either the Jewish or Christian holy books.
Mostly it is Milton.

[NeoGreen]

10. That's not what we read in this forum, where some people...

...claim they know, literally.

[NeoGreen]

11. And is Milton an undiscovered disciple...

...and can his books be canon, if written after the council of Nicea?


Hmmmm...

[trotsky]

13. "Lucifer" the "light bringer."

Versus Yahweh who didn't want his creation to learn.

Hmm, tough call there. Perhaps your story means something other than what you've been indoctrinated to think it means.

[NeoGreen]

14. I think I heard this story before...

...

[guillaumeb]

15. Your translation of the name Lucifer is correct.

What follows is simply your narrative, with all of your preconceptions and hostility toward faith.

[trotsky]

16. Every time you accuse others of following a narrative...

an angel loses its wings.

Why don't you defend your position instead of attacking me?

[guillaumeb]

17. Perhaps if you debated my actual positions......eom

[trotsky]

18. Is your actual position that Lucifer was the bad guy?

And that he literally existed?

If not, please state your actual position.

[guillaumeb]

20. The sin of Lucifer was pride.

And the character of Lucifer is a metaphor for pride leading to being apart from the Creator.

My view.

[trotsky]

23. So, was Lucifer the bad guy?

Who created him?

Who created in him the ability to feel pride?

Was it all a set up?

[Mariana]

19. Lucifer didn't do that all by himself, did he?

This particular story is fascinating. A bunch of the angels hated the rule of The Creator™ so much that they tried to stage a coup in Heaven. What did they think The Creator™ was doing wrong, that they thought they could do better? Granted, The Creator™ created humans such that none can avoid sin, and no one can reasonably argue that a 100% failure rate isn't a bad design. Maybe Lucifer and the rest of the rebels *could* have done a better job of it than The Creator™ did.

[guillaumeb]

21. The story of Lucifer illustrates pride leading to a separation from the Creator,

My view.

[Bretton Garcia]

22. Bringer of light partly relates to the planet Venus;

Usually the last small light visible in the sky in the morning, or the first at night.

Interestingly? Long after the Old Testament (?) seemed to condemn such a "star" as often low or fallen, Jesus calls himself this day star.

Jesus there being subtly identified with Lucifer/venus . Probably because of the many changes/betrayals he and Christianity made relative to Judaism, the Old Testament god.

Among those changes? Jesus is regarded as more human and forgiving than the old inflexible God.

Another reading.

[guillaumeb]

25. I understand.

Plus we both know that Christianity absorbed many things from the religions that it replaced.

[Bretton Garcia]

40. But in this reading, it is Jesus and Christianity that pridefully...

... separated from Judaism, and it's Old Testament God, Jahweh. In spite of constant protestations of total faith and loyalty.

This may be an important, shocking subtext in the New Testament itself: Jesus and Christianity actually betraying or departing from the God they claimed to faithfully follow.

Some suggest that even that betrayal was a good thing; Jesus was more gentle or forgiving, than the old God.

Still? It suggests that religions often cover up huge changes in allegedly fixed, eternal beliefs. Leading us to wonder if any religion - even the modern deist religion of the Founders, and their "Creator" - is as stable or certain or useful or sacred, as some imply.

Thank you for you response.

[guillaumeb]

42. Christians believe that Jesus perfected the message of the Creator.

Muslims believe the same of Muhammed.

So neither is seen by believers as betraying anything.

[trotsky]

24. And you get zero response to a very good question.

Typical of Christian apologetics. Ignore the difficult questions asked, and answer one you prefer instead.

Why DID a band of angels revolt? What did they see that they felt was wrong? Were they given a hearing for their grievances? "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." -- JFK

[guillaumeb]

26. Why did they revolt?

Last edited Wed Jul 31, 2019, 08:54 PM - Edit history (1)

Because they could. It is called free will, and it is essential to growth.

[hurl]

29. A bit OT

I won't belabor it in this thread, just curious... Do you ascribe foreknowledge to the god you believe in?

[guillaumeb]

35. My faith leads me to believe in a Creator.

But even with foreknowledge, free will is either present or it is not.

[trotsky]

30. I have the free will to murder someone right now.

But I don't.

"Having free will" doesn't answer the question, and I think you know that. I hope.

WHY did they revolt against your perfect, loving creator? What could they possibly have been upset about?

[Mariana]

31. All of the angels could have risen up, but they didn't.

So, obviously, the ones who did so didn't do it just "because they could". Furthermore, they had to know their odds of winning were very slim indeed. They were going up against The Creator™ after all. Something very serious must have motivated them.

[guillaumeb]

36. Also obvious is that free will allows each being to choose their actions.

So your point reinforces my own. And free will means that we are free to make inappropriate and/or harmful choices.

[saidsimplesimon]

28. Mariana, well done

100% failure rate is just an example of why I find real humour in your comment. There will be a few who see through a glass darkly and will miss the truth in your words.

[Pendrench]

33. Hi Mariana - thank you for posting this thought provoking question.

I can only offer my own personal thoughts/opinion, but perhaps Lucifer and the other angels were motivated not because they thought The Creator was doing something wrong (and they thought they could do a better, job) but rather the motivation was jealousy?

In other words, they wanted the power/glory associated with The Creator - so they rebelled to claim the power/glory for themselves.

Naturally this is just speculation on my part - I greatly appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with you!

Wishing you well and peace

Tim

[guillaumeb]

37. An interesting point.

Perhaps the pride leads to the jealousy?

[AtheistCrusader]

34. Well, why not, he was a shitty creator.

[guillaumeb]

38. If you were the Creator, what would you have done differently?

[DetlefK]

39. Would have created an intelligent being and watched what happens next.

Adam was human in body, but was he human in mind?

The defining trait of a human is the ability to think. In humans, the ability to think has reached an exceptional height that distinguishes them from all other animals.

The very concept that we should explore and judge and weigh each other and the world in terms of thinking, that is the basis of zoroastrian philosophy, which eventually inspired greek philosophy, which eventually (after lots of steps and lucky historical coincidences) lead to the scientific method and where we are today.



Look at what us humans have built and tremble in awe, for we are just one more link in a chain that began millennia ago.

Adam could not have built anything. He wasted his days and blindly accepted what he was told.

[guillaumeb]

43. Sentient beings are intelligent.

But not perfect.

And a critical part of intelligence, in my view, is realizing one's limits.

[DetlefK]

45. Okay, but now we need a definition for sentient.

My personal definition of intelligence is the ability to go insane.
A person can go insane. A snail can not.

What's interesting is, a few years ago, scientists made an AI with a weird configuration of thinking to see how it would develop. The AI effectively became schizophrenic.

[guillaumeb]

46. Self awareness is critical.

And relatively high levels of intelligence.

One might also say that language is critical.

[AtheistCrusader]

41. Is that rhetorical, or do you want an actual list?

First off, I guess, creation would actually look like an engineered, created system. Not a natural product of a natural universe that didn't require an actual creator to get to its current state.

[guillaumeb]

44. But would this system be perfect, or allow for growth?

Would this system decay, like all systems do?

[AtheistCrusader]

47. Depends.

Not being omnipotent and omniscient, it is difficult for me to speculate on what my motives would still be. One can only assume it is possible that I might choose either, or a combination, or multiple universes with different sets of rules.

The only thing I don't think I would do, is create a universe that deceptively appears to not have been created at all.

[guillaumeb]

48. Perhaps the tools of the Creator are too fine and leave such subtle marks

that you cannot see them.

[AtheistCrusader]

49. Well, there's a couple ways of looking at it.

Yes, I would expect to see such 'marks' and I assume you're using this because I've mentioned it before, but another form of 'tool mark' I would expect to see is just a flat out impossibility of something 'naturally' reaching a particular state.

It's a condition that science IS looking for (Cosmology) and isn't finding.

Not the same as 'we don't know how this happened', but actually finding something that CAN NOT have happened any other way.

[guillaumeb]

51. Expecting to see such marks, or recognizing that the marks are there,

implies an equivalence with the creation and the Creator.

[AtheistCrusader]

54. It implies nothing more than the capacity to understand our Universe.

If that's enough to be equivalent with a creator, so be it.

[trotsky]

50. So you worship a god intent on tricking people.

Interesting.

[guillaumeb]

52. The word "tricking" is your framing.

And we understand that.

[trotsky]

53. Now you're the royal "we"?

Sheesh. Support your argument instead of throwing around your bullshit "framing" accusation.

But I know you won't. Because you can't.

[LuvLoogie]

32. Love is divine.