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

i would say it has a lot to do with the scientific revolution along with less emphasis on strict religious dogma. christianity has become sort of watered down in the west which has made it a lot more compatible with a modern progressive society. also i would say reformed christian values did help influence a lot of things that made things better such as humanism and what not but it wasn't the sole influence by any means.

as for islamic countries i think when they were on top it was a lot of the same virtues mentioned above which helped get them there. they took quite a few steps backwards when they started emphasizing a more fundamentalist approach imo, and that was made even worse through western colonialism which marginalized their political structures and bolstered the power of the mosques in those societies. and of course that same colonialism helped the west get to the point we're currently at financially so it cuts both ways.

Originally posted by bluewaterrider
There's a point at which stated distinctions do not make much of a difference.

Lucifer APPEARS differently than Satan for most, but, if they are, in fact, the [b]same being ... ?

Also, I don't recall saying GreatestIAm is evil.
Or telling him he would go to hell. [/B]

Don't give me that. Connecting someone's religion to Lucifer is clearly calling them evil.

to be fair he could just think he's deceived by satan. doesn't necessarily make him evil. plus greatest i am hasn't exactly been shy about blasting other people's religions so fair game imo.

Originally posted by red g jacks
i would say it has a lot to do with the scientific revolution along with less emphasis on strict religious dogma. christianity has become sort of watered down in the west which has made it a lot more compatible with a modern progressive society. also i would say reformed christian values did help influence a lot of things that made things better such as humanism and what not but it wasn't the sole influence by any means...

So, what you are saying is that Christianity is better today because of outside influences?

If Christianity was a "true" religion, wouldn't it be better in its pure form, and worse when influenced for outside?

i think everything is a work in progress tbh, religion included. being a godless heathen myself i obviously don't believe in divinely inspired writing in general.

but to be perfectly blunt i do prefer some religions over others. fundamentalist islam is probably my least favorite aside from some fringe ones like scientology and black hebrews.

Originally posted by red g jacks
to be fair he could just think he's deceived by satan. doesn't necessarily make him evil. plus greatest i am hasn't exactly been shy about blasting other people's religions so fair game imo.

True, to a degree, and I thought the same way in the beginning. But he was attacked by Christians from the very beginning, and has responded poorly.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, what you are saying is that Christianity is better today because of outside influences?

If Christianity was a "true" religion, wouldn't it be better in its pure form, and worse when influenced for outside?

It makes sense for a religion to adapt itself to how humans grow and learn, their practices and their experiences. I don't remember if it's from the Bible (it does have that snarky Jesus tone to it, but I'm not 100% sure and in this forum I'll be corrected if I'm misquoting), but the famous line "sabath is made for man and not man for sabath" comes to mind.

Maybe christianity was never meant to have a "pure form"? Or it got properly altered later, afterall, the church is supposed to be a living entity and by definition it should change.

^yea pretty sure that's from the bible. jesus said it after some of his friends were caught violating the sabbath iirc

Originally posted by Bentley
It makes sense for a religion to adapt itself to how humans grow and learn, their practices and their experiences. I don't remember if it's from the Bible (it does have that snarky Jesus tone to it, but I'm not 100% sure and in this forum I'll be corrected if I'm misquoting), but the famous line "sabath is made for man and not man for sabath" comes to mind.

Maybe christianity was never meant to have a "pure form"? Or it got properly altered later, afterall, the church is supposed to be a living entity and by definition it should change.

I believe that Christianity was man-made, and therefore, should grow and change over time. But that is in direct contradiction with a divine Jesus that leads the Church.

that really depends on how much authority you place on orthodox interpretations of scripture imo. maybe reinterpreting it isn't a contradiction if the original interpretation was flawed. plus if it's jesus changing the rules then you would have to assume he has the authority to do so.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I believe that Christianity was man-made, and therefore, should grow and change over time. But that is in direct contradiction with a divine Jesus that leads the Church.

Well, Jesus was a man so his teaching are all man-made. Those who consider Jesus to be divine also admit, for most christian denominations at least, that he was truly a man.

Originally posted by Bentley
Well, Jesus was a man so his teaching are all man-made. Those who consider Jesus to be divine also admit, for most christian denominations at least, that he was truly a man.

We seem to be on the same side of the discussion.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
We seem to be on the same side of the discussion.

I think you do a good work at finding the sense of christianity by being beyond christianity.

That's a line that I cannot really say without making it sound stupid somehow, but I rather still say it.

Originally posted by Bentley
I think you do a good work at finding the sense of christianity by being beyond christianity.

That's a line that I cannot really say without making it sound stupid somehow, but I rather still say it.

Thank you, but I still have my demons (that's figurative demons not literal demons 😂 ).

😂

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Thank you, but I still have my demons (that's figurative demons not literal demons 😂 ).

This statement ... nags at the edge of consciousness.
To say the least.

The Christian view is that demons did, and arguably do, exist.

And literally, not merely figuratively.

I understand you are telling us you did not mean that literally, though, of course.

how would one know if they had literal demons?

serious question.

Originally posted by Bentley
Well, Jesus was a man so his teaching(s) are all man-made.
Those who consider Jesus to be divine also admit, for most Christian denominations at least, that he was truly a man.

This doesn't QUITE work ...

I'm tempted to ascribe this to something getting lost in translation, as French, not English, is your first language.

The truth, however, is that this is a somewhat difficult concept to relate even for native English speakers.

The flaw is hard to state directly but perhaps can be illustrated by parallel example:

"Jesus was a man. So his power to heal sick people was all man-made."
"Jesus was a man. So his ability to walk on water was all man-made."
"Jesus was a man. So his prowess at multiplying a boy's lunch into a meal for thousands was all man-made."

It is, of course, possible to say "Right! Everything listed above is an invention that did not happen, or used the most liberal interpretations imaginable! It is the fanciful storytelling of man. It is man-made."

On the other hand, if you believe Jesus really did all the things listed above, you would see the implication that Jesus was ONLY a man, fails.
From the Christian perspective, the authors of the Bible clearly intended us to understand there was a supernatural aspect to Jesus that is beyond man as we commonly employ the term, or at least that he used power which is not innately OF man.

LOL@ the ridiculous notion that Jesus was only a man. He was MUCH more than that AND He still is. You atheists keep the silly comments coming. They give me a good laugh.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison

Connecting someone's religion to Lucifer is clearly calling them evil.

Originally posted by red g jacks

to be fair he could just think he's deceived by satan.
doesn't necessarily make him evil.
plus, greatest i am hasn't exactly been shy about blasting other people's religions, so, fair game, imo.

For the record, I was not and am not trying to personally attack GreatestIAm.

The problem is precisely that Gnosticism IS connected to Lucifer, because it is tightly connected to the story of Creation, God, the Garden of Eden, and knowledge and wisdom, which Gnosticism asserts Lucifer, as the snake, helped BRING to mankind.

It is simply not possible to talk about Gnosticism in a meaningful way without connecting it to Lucifer.