The Theist Thread - Let's Share

Paleocon wrote:
DSGamer wrote:
NSMike wrote:

With respect, Certis already booted LarryC from our thread. We should play nice and back off, regardless of the claims made. Let the fellow theists argue whether or not Jesus as a historical figure matters to the thread.

This.

I think Paleocon's question was thought provoking and interesting. However, we begged and pleaded with people to stop badgering us in "our" thread. I wish we'd extend the same courtesy.

Hence why I apologized and stepped out.

Much appreciated...both for stepping out and your contribution.

Paleocon, send me PMs if you have anything else you want answered.

darrenl wrote:

Send me PMs if you have anything else you want answered Paleocon.

I will just say this and then bow out - I find your propensity to make comments like the above *remarkably* offensive. Most of the people engaging you are lifelong Catholics who left the church not because they are uneducated on the church's doctrine, but because they don't believe in it. Your attempts to proselytize and educate the unwashed masses is most unwelcome.

I don't think you are intending to come across as rudely as you do, and I enjoy reading people's thought on their religion or lack of it. I have no personal agenda here and I cannot speak for others, but you should be advised that you do not come across well with statements like the above.

SallyNasty wrote:
darrenl wrote:

Send me PMs if you have anything else you want answered Paleocon.

I will just say this and then bow out - I find your propensity to make comments like the above *remarkably* offensive. Most of the people engaging you are lifelong Catholics who left the church not because they are uneducated on the church's doctrine, but because they don't believe in it. Your attempts to proselytize and educate the unwashed masses is most unwelcome.

I don't think you are intending to come across as rudely as you do, and I enjoy reading people's thought on their religion or lack of it. I have no personal agenda here and I cannot speak for others, but you should be advised that you do not come across well with statements like the above.

Thanks for the comment SallyNasty...however, my invite to field Paleocon's questions without derailing the OP still stands, should he have any.

Cheers...

I feel like I missed something here. I've been crazy busy the last week and have not kept up with a lot of my threads, so it is certainly possible.

I don't get why the atheist were being asked to leave. I understand the need for two threads, as it keeps them more focused, but that doesn't mean we should start kicking anyone out that we don't agree with. I thought Paleocon's question was especially thought provoking (and I apologize that I haven't taken the time to answer it yet). Being challenged, being forced to answer hard questions about your faith is vital. Without thought, faith is meaningless. But maybe that's just the Jew in me; Israel does mean "God Wrestler" after all.

Without competing voices, this thread is in danger of becoming an echo chamber. And frankly, if I have to choose between echo chambers, much of the time I'd rather listen to the Atheist one.

When the two combine, things tend to get circular and boring, and subsequently locked, rather quickly.

Garden Ninja wrote:

I feel like I missed something here. I've been crazy busy the last week and have not kept up with a lot of my threads, so it is certainly possible.

I don't get why the atheist were being asked to leave. I understand the need for two threads, as it keeps them more focused, but that doesn't mean we should start kicking anyone out that we don't agree with. I thought Paleocon's question was especially thought provoking (and I apologize that I haven't taken the time to answer it yet). Being challenged, being forced to answer hard questions about your faith is vital. Without thought, faith is meaningless. But maybe that's just the Jew in me; Israel does mean "God Wrestler" after all.

Without competing voices, this thread is in danger of becoming an echo chamber. And frankly, if I have to choose between echo chambers, much of the time I'd rather listen to the Atheist one.

Hmmm...I'm wondering why, then, when a competing voice like...say...LarryC comes into the Atheist thread, he gets a "get out of our thread" from the Atheists followed by a tossing from Certis. The standard was set in the other thread...not here.

No such tossing has happened in this conversation...in fact the Atheists have policed themselves (..rather nicely..) when it comes to commenting here so that no Theist would have cause to comment in their thread. Well...wish granted.

Clarification: my participation in the other thread was generally along lines already initiated by other participants. My posts were meant to engage, not to compete. When positive comments about religion proved unwelcome, I tried talking about agnosticism instead (a topic also broached by others).

Comment: Shouldn't we be talking about theism?

I find it interesting that there are many facets to belief and faith. Some Christians, only exposed to "Pharisees" and "Jews" primarily in negative light in the New Testament, come to be intolerant of Jews, and members of other religions, and the Churches themselves, of course, as temporal and world entities guided by men could fall prey to human weaknesses. Of course, we were also advised not to judge and that anyone who is not against us is with us.

darrenl wrote:

Hmmm...I'm wondering why, then, when a competing voice like...say...LarryC comes into the Atheist thread, he gets a "get out of our thread" from the Atheists followed by a tossing from Certis. The standard was set in the other thread...not here.

Context, baby. Context. LarryC came into an Atheist thread specifically for sharing experiences/fears about revealing non theist beliefs to the theist majority. The agnostic branch of discussion happened (edit: or I should say "was continued) in a different thread more keyed to that track. But I guess we can just pretend that all the Atheist threads are like that first one. That wouldn't be a continuation of a larger theme we've found in those threads at all.

And to be a little more on-topic for this thread: I'd be curious to see an 'insider' discussion about the part of Theist belief that seems to be side-lined most of the time: Satan, fallen angels, Demons, and their role in your faith. There's a trend I've noticed in those of faith around me to attribute ALL things to a divine plan. Every hurdle is just an opportunity in disguise. Does this mean that Satan has no power in this world anymore? Or was Satan just a device contrived by God during the early years to scapegoat the nastier parts of his plan for us?

Rezzy wrote:

And to be a little more on-topic for this thread: I'd be curious to see an 'insider' discussion about the part of Theist belief that seems to be side-lined most of the time: Satan, fallen angels, Demons, and their role in your faith. There's a trend I've noticed in those of faith around me to attribute ALL things to a divine plan. Every hurdle is just an opportunity in disguise. Does this mean that Satan has no power in this world anymore? Or was Satan just a device contrived by God during the early years to scapegoat the nastier parts of his plan for us?

I'm not sure I see why/how you're linking "hurdles" or "a divine plan in ALL things" to Satan purpose or supposed power. Can you clarify what you mean, exactly?

darrenl wrote:

I'm not sure I see why you're linking "hurdles" or "a divine plan" to Satan purpose or supposed power. Can you clarify what you mean, exactly?

Certainly: Does Satan have free will? Or do all of Satan's actions align to God's greater plan in the long run? Is there an event in recent memory that could be directly attributed to Satan? Or is Satan just a parable for 'the evil in men?'

Edit: Maybe this will make it more clear: In the past it was demons or Satan that caused illness or great hardship. In recent years it is God that is sending those things to either test or teach, to focus the faith of the afflicted or their survivors...

Rezzy wrote:
darrenl wrote:

I'm not sure I see why you're linking "hurdles" or "a divine plan" to Satan purpose or supposed power. Can you clarify what you mean, exactly?

Certainly: Does Satan have free will? Or do all of Satan's actions align to God's greater plan in the long run? Is there an event in recent memory that could be directly attributed to Satan? Or is Satan just a parable for 'the evil in men?'

Cool. Thanks for clarifying Rez.

Does Satan have free will? Yes. All the angels do...and Lucifer was no exception.

Do all of Satan's actions align to God's greater plan in the long run? Yes. God uses evil to achieve greater good. Biggest example is the death of Jesus. Clearly an evil act, but the good it caused...in the Christian tradition...is immeasurable.

Is there an event in recent memory that could be directly attributed to Satan? No. Satan can only temp, he can't directly cause events. He has no power over our free will, and ultimately we can choose to either reject or go with the temptations. Now, were some acts in history indirectly caused by temptations directly from him, i.e. WW2? We'll never really know the answer to that without getting extremely speculative.

Is Satan just a parable for 'the evil in men?' No. Jesus talked about him quite a bit and the way in which he did talk about him was not in parable format.

CheezePavilion wrote:

I love that part: "hey guys--is your god a big fat liar? Please discuss for me!"

*Shrug* I'm just acknowledging that not EVERY theist in the room considers every part of the Bible a literal document. If that feels like disrespect to you then please make sure to explicitly list your own beliefs so that I can be sure not to offend you with my questions.

Rezzy wrote:
CheezePavilion wrote:

I love that part: "hey guys--is your god a big fat liar? Please discuss for me!"

*Shrug* I'm just acknowledging that not EVERY theist in the room considers every part of the Bible a literal document. If that feels like disrespect to you then please make sure to explicitly list your own beliefs so that I can be sure not to offend you with my questions.

Sure ya are ; D

darrenl wrote:

Do all of Satan's actions align to God's greater plan in the long run? Yes. God uses evil to achieve greater good. Biggest example is the death of Jesus. Clearly an evil act...but the good it caused...in the Christian tradition...is immeasurable.

And just to add to that and keep things clear, I'm assuming when you say "uses evil" we're talking doctrine of double effect here, not the old "if I kill Hitler's parents..." deal.

darrenl wrote:

Is there an event in recent memory that could be directly attributed to Satan? No. Satan can only temp, he can't directly cause events. He has no power over our free will, and ultimately we can choose to either reject or go with the temptations.

Thanks for your answers, darrenl. The official Catholic perspective is one I am actually somewhat familiar with, but the 'temp' component always bothered me. Like the literal angel and devil sitting on each shoulder. In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave. But that's the trouble with the ineffable.

Curious if anyone else will chime in, or if the Catholic viewpoint will be the only one represented.

CheezePavilion wrote:

Sure ya are ; D

Seriously? Yeah. I'm out. Guess I stumbled into the Christian Thread by mistake. Give me a yell when/if you get back to discussing Theist beliefs.

Rezzy wrote:

And to be a little more on-topic for this thread: I'd be curious to see an 'insider' discussion about the part of Theist belief that seems to be side-lined most of the time: Satan, fallen angels, Demons, and their role in your faith. There's a trend I've noticed in those of faith around me to attribute ALL things to a divine plan. Every hurdle is just an opportunity in disguise. Does this mean that Satan has no power in this world anymore? Or was Satan just a device contrived by God during the early years to scapegoat the nastier parts of his plan for us?

I love that part: "hey guys--is your god a big fat liar? Please discuss for me!"

In any case Rezzy, it's even harder to talk of trends in those "of faith" than it is among atheists. Not sure you're going to find anyone here that attributes all things to a divine plan: sounds like you're hanging out around edit: people influenced by doctrine of Predestination?

darrenl wrote:

No. Satan can only temp,

Sorry, I wouldn't normally post in this thread, but that's a hilarious typo.

Stengah wrote:
darrenl wrote:

No. Satan can only temp,

Sorry, I wouldn't normally post in this thread, but that's a hilarious typo.

I have to admit it made me chuckle. If he fixes it I'll fix my quote of it as well.

Rezzy wrote:
Stengah wrote:
darrenl wrote:

No. Satan can only temp,

Sorry, I wouldn't normally post in this thread, but that's a hilarious typo.

I have to admit it made me chuckle. If he fixes it I'll fix my quote of it as well.

No wonder he went evil, he can't find a lasting job.

Stengah wrote:
Rezzy wrote:
Stengah wrote:
darrenl wrote:

No. Satan can only temp,

Sorry, I wouldn't normally post in this thread, but that's a hilarious typo.

I have to admit it made me chuckle. If he fixes it I'll fix my quote of it as well.

No wonder he went evil, he can't find a lasting job.

Now I've got an image of a devil smoking dope and playing bongo drums.

Stengah wrote:
darrenl wrote:

No. Satan can only temp,

Sorry, I wouldn't normally post in this thread, but that's a hilarious typo.

damnit!!! lol

I'm not even going to fix the typo...as an example to others. heh.

Rezzy wrote:

In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave. But that's the trouble with the ineffable.

Satan doesn't really come up that often in Judaism, but when he does, this is pretty much how it works. Probably the main text to look at is Job. In the Book of Job, an angel (called "ha-Shatan", which is really a title -- the adversary, prosecutor, accuser, or something like that -- not a name) declares to God that Job is only pious because he is prosperous, and received permission from God to test this theory. Eventually, after basically completely turning his life to utter sh*t (his livestock killed or stolen, his children killed, ill with boils) causes Job to curse the day he was born.

I suppose you could focus on extreme piety of Job, that it took near total destruction of everything he loved to shake his faith. Or on the satan character and posit whether resentment of humanity lead to the question being raised in the first place. Both of these, I think are the lessons that Christianity takes from the text.

However, in my own reading, and my understanding of some of the Jewish thought on the text, is that it serves as the biblical equivalent of a "sh*t happens" bumper sticker, shutting down the idea that being pious will directly lead to earthly fortune, and show that bad things do in fact happen to good people.

Rezzy wrote:

Thanks for your answers, darrenl. The official Catholic perspective is one I am actually somewhat familiar with, but the 'temp' component always bothered me. Like the literal angel and devil sitting on each shoulder. In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave. But that's the trouble with the ineffable.

No, that is certainly not the Christian understanding regarding the relationship between God and Satan...that's more Greek than anything else, i.e. that we're just here for the amusement of God and Satan while they play their little game of "gotchya". Satan isn't even God's equal...or rival for that matter, so they couldn't be on a "team" even if there was one. Satan's rival has always been Michael...not God.

darrenl wrote:
Rezzy wrote:

Thanks for your answers, darrenl. The official Catholic perspective is one I am actually somewhat familiar with, but the 'temp' component always bothered me. Like the literal angel and devil sitting on each shoulder. In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave. But that's the trouble with the ineffable.

No, that is certainly not the Christian understanding regarding the relationship between God and Satan...that's more Greek than anything else, i.e. that we're just here for the amusement of God and Satan while they play their little game of "gotchya". Satan isn't even God's equal...or rival for that matter, so they couldn't be on a "team" even if there was one. Satan's rival has always been Michael...not God.

By Christian, you may actually mean Catholic. The above actually tracks pretty closely with my understanding of Calvinism and its descendants.

Tanglebones wrote:
darrenl wrote:
Rezzy wrote:

Thanks for your answers, darrenl. The official Catholic perspective is one I am actually somewhat familiar with, but the 'temp' component always bothered me. Like the literal angel and devil sitting on each shoulder. In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave. But that's the trouble with the ineffable.

No, that is certainly not the Christian understanding regarding the relationship between God and Satan...that's more Greek than anything else, i.e. that we're just here for the amusement of God and Satan while they play their little game of "gotchya". Satan isn't even God's equal...or rival for that matter, so they couldn't be on a "team" even if there was one. Satan's rival has always been Michael...not God.

By Christian, you may actually mean Catholic. The above actually tracks pretty closely with my understanding of Calvinism and its descendants.

That Satan and God are on the same team? Hmmmm...doubtful. Can you source this for me where that is either implied or stated outright?

darrenl wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
darrenl wrote:
Rezzy wrote:

Thanks for your answers, darrenl. The official Catholic perspective is one I am actually somewhat familiar with, but the 'temp' component always bothered me. Like the literal angel and devil sitting on each shoulder. In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave. But that's the trouble with the ineffable.

No, that is certainly not the Christian understanding regarding the relationship between God and Satan...that's more Greek than anything else, i.e. that we're just here for the amusement of God and Satan while they play their little game of "gotchya". Satan isn't even God's equal...or rival for that matter, so they couldn't be on a "team" even if there was one. Satan's rival has always been Michael...not God.

By Christian, you may actually mean Catholic. The above actually tracks pretty closely with my understanding of Calvinism and its descendants.

That Satan and God are on the same team? Hmmmm...doubtful. Can you source this for me where that is either implied or stated outright?

I'm saying that Calvinism and its descendants believe in a God who has a preordained knowledge of which humans are strong, and which will cave, to use Rezzy's language. Catholicism doesn't.

Calvinism is a predestination philosophy. By that reasoning, god could have created Satan to handle all of those not predestined for heaven. So they'd be on the same team in the same way as a cool, nice boss and your HR staff are on the same team.

Tannhauser'd!

Tanglebones wrote:
darrenl wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
darrenl wrote:
Rezzy wrote:

Thanks for your answers, darrenl. The official Catholic perspective is one I am actually somewhat familiar with, but the 'temp' component always bothered me. Like the literal angel and devil sitting on each shoulder. In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave. But that's the trouble with the ineffable.

No, that is certainly not the Christian understanding regarding the relationship between God and Satan...that's more Greek than anything else, i.e. that we're just here for the amusement of God and Satan while they play their little game of "gotchya". Satan isn't even God's equal...or rival for that matter, so they couldn't be on a "team" even if there was one. Satan's rival has always been Michael...not God.

By Christian, you may actually mean Catholic. The above actually tracks pretty closely with my understanding of Calvinism and its descendants.

That Satan and God are on the same team? Hmmmm...doubtful. Can you source this for me where that is either implied or stated outright?

I'm saying that Calvinism and its descendants believe in a God who has a preordained knowledge of which humans are strong, and which will cave, to use Rezzy's language. Catholicism doesn't.

In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave

I understand that. But the point of contention in the sentence highlighted was that God and Satan are on the same team and the reason or proof of that is predestination. Sure, Calvinists have predestination, but none of them think that what falls from that is that God and Satan are on the same side.

From predestination it does not follow that God and Satan are both on the same side. I don't see the logic there.

darrenl wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
darrenl wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
darrenl wrote:
Rezzy wrote:

Thanks for your answers, darrenl. The official Catholic perspective is one I am actually somewhat familiar with, but the 'temp' component always bothered me. Like the literal angel and devil sitting on each shoulder. In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave. But that's the trouble with the ineffable.

No, that is certainly not the Christian understanding regarding the relationship between God and Satan...that's more Greek than anything else, i.e. that we're just here for the amusement of God and Satan while they play their little game of "gotchya". Satan isn't even God's equal...or rival for that matter, so they couldn't be on a "team" even if there was one. Satan's rival has always been Michael...not God.

By Christian, you may actually mean Catholic. The above actually tracks pretty closely with my understanding of Calvinism and its descendants.

That Satan and God are on the same team? Hmmmm...doubtful. Can you source this for me where that is either implied or stated outright?

I'm saying that Calvinism and its descendants believe in a God who has a preordained knowledge of which humans are strong, and which will cave, to use Rezzy's language. Catholicism doesn't.

In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave

I understand that. But the point of contention in the sentence highlighted was that God and Satan are on the same team and the reason or proof of that is predestination. Sure, Calvinists have predestination, but none of them think that what falls from that is that God and Satan are on the same side.

From predestination it does not follow that God and Satan are both on the same side. I don't see the logic there.

I'd go back and re-read Job, then, because it seems like the ha-Satan and God have a pretty cozy working relationship there. In any case, bowing back out of the theist thread again.

Tanglebones wrote:
darrenl wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
darrenl wrote:
Tanglebones wrote:
darrenl wrote:
Rezzy wrote:

Thanks for your answers, darrenl. The official Catholic perspective is one I am actually somewhat familiar with, but the 'temp' component always bothered me. Like the literal angel and devil sitting on each shoulder. In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave. But that's the trouble with the ineffable.

No, that is certainly not the Christian understanding regarding the relationship between God and Satan...that's more Greek than anything else, i.e. that we're just here for the amusement of God and Satan while they play their little game of "gotchya". Satan isn't even God's equal...or rival for that matter, so they couldn't be on a "team" even if there was one. Satan's rival has always been Michael...not God.

By Christian, you may actually mean Catholic. The above actually tracks pretty closely with my understanding of Calvinism and its descendants.

That Satan and God are on the same team? Hmmmm...doubtful. Can you source this for me where that is either implied or stated outright?

I'm saying that Calvinism and its descendants believe in a God who has a preordained knowledge of which humans are strong, and which will cave, to use Rezzy's language. Catholicism doesn't.

In the end it seems like they're all working for the same team since God should know which of us are strong and which of us may cave

I understand that. But the point of contention in the sentence highlighted was that God and Satan are on the same team and the reason or proof of that is predestination. Sure, Calvinists have predestination, but none of them think that what falls from that is that God and Satan are on the same side.

From predestination it does not follow that God and Satan are both on the same side. I don't see the logic there.

I'd go back and re-read Job, then, because it seems like the ha-Satan and God have a pretty cozy working relationship there. In any case, bowing back out of the theist thread again.

I think maybe there's an issue here of:

"has Satan always been God's enemy according to Catholic/other Christian/etc. theology"

and

"has Satan always been God's enemy in the eyes of people who believed in an Abrahamic religion"

Those are two possibly very different questions.

The idea that it is not literal is clearly a Catholic perspective, though, and not a generally Christian one.