Billion + believe in Satan. Should all schools be mandated to teach Creationism?

Originally posted by Bentley
I did not know the OP was an atheist. Never [struck] me as one.

With all due respect to Star, "Greatest I am" is about as atheist as the Pope.

He subscribes instead to something called Gnosticism. It's a form of Luciferianism, and its tenets, having names as exotic as those found in the Bible WITHOUT the name recognition of that work for most people, sounds like something from a bad drug trip.

Have you ever wondered how God could allow bad things to happen?
Have you ever wondered how the Bible could have God speak as if He Himself is the author of calamity in certain places?

Gnostics believe they have the answer.
A being would have to be so conflicted as to be mad in their view, and so the God identified by Christians as Jehovah, Yaweh, God the Father, etcetera IS mad in the Gnostic view, he is, in "fact" a being called the "Demiurge" or, more formally "Yaldabaoth", and is literally insane.

By contrast, however, Gnostics believe that the serpent of the garden, ie Lucifer, is actually a being who was concerned with the enlightenment of man, wisdom, hence the name "Light Bearer". The Bible is, in the Gnostic view, a sort of twisted propoganda form of the "real" story of God and Satan (ie Lucifer).

Hence, light is dark, black is white, good is evil, etcetera.

Re-examine what you see from "Greatest I Am" with this knowledge.

Better yet, examine the first 2 minutes (or as much as you choose) from the 7 minute clip below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_OZtVxNQtc

Better still, do just a little research on your own by Googling or Wikipedia-ing "demiurge" and Gnosticism.

Greatest I Am is not an atheist. He just believes, or at least claims, that the God of the Bible is the deceiver of mankind, not Satan.

That makes a bit more sense, nobody who is atheist spends time nitpicking the Bible like that.

He'd like Three Versions of Judas.

I think God should be a common talk in the home.
I don't know that we have to go as far as at school as well.

Originally posted by Wonder Man
I think God should be a common talk in the home.
I don't know that we have to go as far as at school as well.

Are you okay with schools teaching evolution and the big bang?

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
With all due respect to Star, "Greatest I am" is about as atheist as the Pope.

He subscribes instead to something called Gnosticism. It's a form of Luciferianism, and its tenets, having names as exotic as those found in the Bible WITHOUT the name recognition of that work for most people, sounds like something from a bad drug trip.

Have you ever wondered how God could allow bad things to happen?
Have you ever wondered how the Bible could have God speak as if He Himself is the author of calamity in certain places?

Gnostics believe they have the answer.
A being would have to be so conflicted as to be mad in their view, and so the God identified by Christians as Jehovah, Yaweh, God the Father, etcetera IS mad in the Gnostic view, he is, in "fact" a being called the "Demiurge" or, more formally "Yaldabaoth", and is literally insane.

By contrast, however, Gnostics believe that the serpent of the garden, ie Lucifer, is actually a being who was concerned with the en[b]lightenment of man, wisdom, hence the name "Light Bearer". The Bible is, in the Gnostic view, a sort of twisted propoganda form of the "real" story of God and Satan (ie Lucifer).

Hence, light is dark, black is white, good is evil, etcetera.

Re-examine what you see from "Greatest I Am" with this knowledge.

Better yet, examine the first 2 minutes (or as much as you choose) from the 7 minute clip below.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_OZtVxNQtc

Better still, do just a little research on your own by Googling or Wikipedia-ing "demiurge" and Gnosticism.

Greatest I Am is not an atheist. He just believes, or at least claims, that the God of the Bible is the deceiver of mankind, not Satan. [/B]

I should've been more clear in my original post. I've always known deep down that the OP is just a Satan wannabe. All one has to do is look at the deceitful trash he posts on an almost daily basis and his "talking snake" avatar. But, he at least makes claims with some of his statements that he is an atheist. I mean afterall, he said in his original post "we must save our kids from the belief in the supernatural" and the foolish belief in creationism. I've always realized that he's just a liar like his idol, the Prince of lies: Satan.

Originally posted by Star428
I should've been more clear in my original post. I've always known deep down that the OP is just a Satan wannabe. All one has to do is look at the deceitful trash he posts on an almost daily basis and his "talking snake" avatar. But, he at least makes claims with some of his statements that he is an atheist. I mean afterall, he said in his original post "we must save our kids from the belief in the supernatural" and the foolish belief in creationism. I've always realized that he's just a liar like his idol, the Prince of lies: Satan.

🙄 You seem to have no religions tolerance.

Originally posted by Star428
I should've been more clear in my original post. I've always known deep down that the OP is just a Satan wannabe. All one has to do is look at the deceitful trash he posts on an almost daily basis and his "talking snake" avatar. But, he at least makes claims with some of his statements that he is an atheist. I mean afterall, he said in his original post "we must save our kids from the belief in the supernatural" and the foolish belief in creationism. I've always realized that he's just a liar like his idol, the Prince of lies: Satan.

The religion forum is perhaps the most challenging I've found on KMC.
Any other place I would balk at the way you're framing this. Actually, I still do.

But I've also found that traditional guidelines don't work very well here.
I don't think I've ever called anyone names. I usually, instead, describe actions.
I would refrain from calling GreatestIAm a liar. On the other hand, it is extremely difficulty to have a meaningful conversation without at the least mentioning that there seems to be a ... disconnect of sorts with some of the things he says versus some of the OTHER things he says.

From the Christian perspective, Gnosticism is Luciferianism, an alternate form of Satanism. It would be difficult for things to be otherwise as Lucifer and Satan in the Bible are, arguably, indistinguishable from one another.
Most would probably say Lucifer IS Satan, and I myself find no good reason to argue differently.

Originally posted by Star428
I should've been more clear in my original post. I've always known deep down that the OP is just a Satan wannabe. All one has to do is look at the deceitful trash he posts on an almost daily basis and his "talking snake" avatar. But, he at least makes claims with some of his statements that he is an atheist. I mean afterall, he said in his original post "we must save our kids from the belief in the supernatural" and the foolish belief in creationism. I've always realized that he's just a liar like his idol, the Prince of lies: Satan.

Problem:

If Satan is the Prince of Lies, what would a follower of his Satan do?

But ... it might be more complicated than that.

In order to be an actual liar telling a lie, you not only have to be saying something untrue, you have to KNOW you are saying something untrue.

Does GreatestIAm meet that criteria?

I've actually spent some time researching such things.
I know from my exploration there are actually Satanists who call themselves Satanists who claim NOT to believe in a literal spirit-being Satan.
(Or Lucifer, for that matter.)

That's sticky.

If they don't believe in a literal Satan, why do they call themselves Satanists?
If they ARE Satanists, though, and their god IS indeed Satan, known as the Prince of Lies in Christianity, wouldn't it make sense for Satanists to lie and say they don't believe in Satan when they actually do?

How do you address a question like that politely?

Originally posted by Star428
I should've been more clear in my original post. I've always known deep down that the OP is just a Satan wannabe. All one has to do is look at the deceitful trash he posts on an almost daily basis and his "talking snake" avatar. But, he at least makes claims with some of his statements that he is an atheist. I mean afterall, he said in his original post "we must save our kids from the belief in the supernatural" and the foolish belief in creationism. I've always realized that he's just a liar like his idol, the Prince of lies: Satan.

To get back more directly to what you're saying, I'm troubled by something else.

Satan, according to Christianity, is a deceiver.
Likewise, though, according to Christianity, Satan is more intelligent than any human on Earth.

If that's so, and Satan is also powerful (the Bible, in fact, calls him "the god of this world"😉 then wouldn't Satan theoretically be able to deceive people into following Satan, THINKING that they are instead following God?

The other possibility is just as bad. If not worse.
And that possibility would be that people KNOW they are following Satan, but lie and say they are not, and present Satan as an angel of Light to the masses.

In point of fact, the Bible itself STRONGLY hints that this is precisely what some people do.

Both Satan and Lucifer are mythological being and do not exist.

Also, Gnosticism is not Luciferianism.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/gnostic2.htm

^ You two are disgusting. Please take your name calling somewhere else.

I don't disagree with anything you said in those 3 posts, bluewaterrider.

LOL@Shakyamunison. You're persistant. I'll give you that but no, he is not a myth and yes, they are the same being. It's just that after Lucifer was kicked out of heaven he became Satan, the devil. Same being. Just different names. Technically speaking, Lucifer=angel and Satan=devil.

Satan also has been called many other names in the bible.

Originally posted by Star428
LOL@Shakyamunison. You're persistant. I'll give you that but no, he is not a myth and yes, they are the same being. It's just that after Lucifer was kicked out of heaven he became Satan, the devil. Same being. Just different names. Technically speaking, Lucifer=angel and Satan=devil.

Satan also has been called many other names in the bible.

I don't believe in angels, Satan or Lucifer. Now please prove to me that any of those exist, and I will change my mind.

Originally posted by Star428
LOL@Shakyamunison. You're persistant. I'll give you that but no, he is not a myth and yes, they are the same being. It's just that after Lucifer was kicked out of heaven he became Satan, the devil. Same being. Just different names. Technically speaking, Lucifer=angel and Satan=devil.

Satan also has been called many other names in the bible.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't believe in angels, Satan or Lucifer. Now please prove to me that any of those exist, and I will change my mind.

This question has been plaguing me for the better part of a year now, and perhaps for far longer: Assuming the Bible to be true, what WOULD Satan look like? In fact, assuming the Bible is true, what DOES Satan look like? Is there any evidence for him or his influence?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Corinthians 4 King James Version (KJV)

4 Therefore seeing we have this ministry, as we have received mercy, we faint not;

2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.

3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:

4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20Corinthians%204&version=KJV

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
This question has been plaguing me for the better part of a year now, and perhaps for far longer: Assuming the Bible to be true, what WOULD Satan look like? In fact, assuming the Bible is true, what DOES Satan look like? Is there any evidence for him or his influence?...

Before you can assume that the bible is true, you must prove that the bible is true.

Originally posted by Star428
LOL@Shakyamunison. You're persistent. I'll give you that, but, no, he is not a myth, and, yes, they are the same being.

It's just that after Lucifer was kicked out of heaven he became Satan, the devil. Same being. Just different names.
Technically speaking, Lucifer=angel and Satan=devil.

Satan also has been called many other names in the bible.

Again I come to this in light of a few Bible passages on the subject, especially the account where Satan takes Jesus up to a mountain, and tells Jesus that he will give Jesus all that Jesus sees -- if only he will bow down and worship Satan.

Nearly everyone I've heard cover this highlights the obvious counter.
Which is NOT used: "These things that I see are not yours to give, Satan!".

In light of the Corinthians verse given in my previous post ...?
That would make considerable sense.

If Satan IS "the god of this world", then most anything on it, for now, would be his to do with as he pleases. This would help explain why people need to actively seek God -- you're likelier to find the OTHER guy if you just look around at random.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Before you can assume that the bible is true, you must prove that the bible is true.

I know of very little in the world that follows that particular "rule", and the very definition of assumption negates your premise. Even in the world of science what happens is that people:

a) observe what is happening in the world around them

b) make an educated guess as to why this is happening based on everything they know

and

c) think of practical ways to test their hypothesis.

What should happen if this is true?
What should happen if it is NOT true?

d) revise theory if necessary, based on the results of additional observation and experimentation

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
I know of very little in the world that follows that particular "rule", and the very definition of assumption negates your premise. Even in the world of science what happens is that people:

a) observe what is happening in the world around them

b) make an educated guess as to why this is happening based on everything they know

and

c) think of practical ways to test their hypothesis.

What should happen if this is true?
What should happen if it is NOT true?

d) revise theory if necessary, based on the results of additional observation and experimentation

If you assume that the bible is true then you must assume that people of the past had access to information directly from God. If that is true then you must answer one over powering question: Why is the bible true, but other books that claim to be the word of God are not true? For example the Koran, the Sutrus of Buddha, and the Vedas. There are many more. Therefore assuming that the bible is true is an extraordinary claim. According to science, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If you assume that the bible is true then you must assume that people of the past had access to information directly from God.

At least some people.

Seems reasonable enough, yes.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
If that is true then you must answer one over powering question: Why is the bible true, but other books that claim to be the word of God are not true?

The simple answer would be that those other books were not authored, and/or not inspired by God in the way Christians believe the Bible to be.

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
At least some people.

Seems reasonable enough, yes.

The simple answer would be that those other books were not authored, and/or not inspired by God in the way Christians believe the Bible to be.

That is an opinion, not proof. And extraordinary proof is required.