If they're not real why would they even be symbolic?

They are symbolic to those who believe in them, like christians and what not. Obviously God represents good, and Satan evil (as it was stated countless numbers of times in this thread already ;))

Oh man, the whole idea of a 'devil' actually existing is laughable (except for Jim7).

The first time the 'devil' actually was mentioned in recorded history, it was referring to people like Augustinus; leaders of religions that were not in agreement with Christian faith. For the record: This was in the first few centuries after the year zero, in which Jesus supposedly was born. It was around this time, too, that the 'devil' took shape. The 'devil' then became a personification in Christian church. How and why, I can't find anywhere, I can only tell you what I know. I'm only guessing it's because they're leaders of an opposing faith, and thus are enemies of God.

When the first translations of Greek and Arabian books, such as the Key Of Salomon, came into existance, there's been quite a misperception. The alchemists, the main subjects of several of these books, asked for help from the 'devil'. Of course, the original publication was simply referring to the leaders of their respective religions. Thanks to this, the Witch Hunts came. And as most of you will probably know, these women were nothing but old folks with interests in herbology, especially the healing powers within several plants. The average people couldn't understand that, and when the translated books became famous (read: When somebody told them what's in the books), they figured it was the work of the 'devil'. Thus, they were dangerous - and the Christian church got quite a lot of followers due to their burnings, hangings and whatnot.


What's the point of this? Simple. The 'devil' ain't much more than a commercial stunt that's gotten out of control.

Totally agree.

(Isn't it the Key of Soloman? Or are you right? I can't remeber)

This discussion is not about the validity of the doctrine itself. The discussion is about a subject within the doctrine.

Wether or not God or Satan are real, symbolic, or nonexistent, or wether or not the Bible is fact or fiction, is completely irrelevant to this discussion.

Back on topic...



I think you misunderstand. Satan didn't turn from God because he was unimpressed; on the contrary, he turned from God because he was impressed. He became so jealous of God's power that he tried to overthrow him and take his place. That's why he and his followers were banished.

The same was the case for humans, when Adam & Eve first sinned; Satan tricked them into thinking that eating the forbidden fruit would make them as powerful as God. They desired that power, ate from the tree (against God's command), and thus were also banished.

it's not the opposite of your mom or a can of soup. it's the opposite of the particles that make them up. quarks have up and down, top and bottom, and strange and charm for example.

when you really think about it, how can something exist without an opposite? without an opposite there is no way to define it. if there's no way to define it can we even percieve it.

there must be a satan for there to be a god. without satan (evil) then how would you define good (and don't give me websters or wikipedia :p )?

Ok. Satan was one of the most powerful angels in heaven. When he rebelled, he led other angels with him. They were all thrown out of heaven. Satan does not have the ability to create. Only perfection can create life (See Below). Angels are not perfect. Only God is perfect. Satan can merely pervert what already exists. Angels can choose to rebel. Just because they were created to serve god doesn't necessarily mean they have no other choice. If they do rebel, they have no hope of redemption, like humans do. Christ died for humanity, not the angels. In my understanding, when people go to heaven, they do not become angels. Angels are the created servants of God. They are different from humans completely and serve a different, specific purpose. The spirit leaves the physical body and goes to heaven, there is no angelic transformation that occures.

More on the perfection issue, I had an interesting discussion in a class at college that ties in very well with this. It was a discussion based on a work of Descartes, summerized in the phrase "I think, therefore I am" It works on logical reasoning and deduction.

~Perfection is knowing without doubting.
~Man does not know everything and doubts much.
~Imperfection is not knowing all, and doubting.
~Not knowing everything, man is imperfect.
~Imperfection is less than perfection.
~If Imperfection is less than perfection and not all-knowing, imperfection cannot understand perfection.
~If man is imperfect, he cannot understand perfection.
~Despite the fact that man is imperfect and thus should have no way of understanding perfection, he still understand the concept something greater than imperfection, perfection itself.
~Since man is imperfect and only perfection can understand perfection, the concept of perfection does not come from man.
~If the concept of perfection does not come from man, it must be given from something outside of man.
~As before stated, the only thing that can understand perfection is perfection itself.
~under the premise of the previous statement, man's understanding of perfection is given from perfection itself.
~Nothing in the physical world is above man, and only something greater than man is capable of being perfect. Therefore, nothing physical is perfect.
~If all that is physical is imperfect, it is less than perfection and therefore incapable of sustaining itself.
~The physical realm cannot sustain itself due to its imperfection, as is displayed in the lack of permanence in all things physical.
~If imperfection cannot sustain itself, it cannot create itself. This is also proven in everyday life and the laws of thermodynamics, as nothing new is created. Energy is merely transfered.
~If imperfection is incapable of creating life, then only something above it, such as perfection, is capable of creation of life.
~If the imperfect is incapable of creating itself, it must be created by something else in order to exist.
~If only perfection can create new life, then the imperfect physical world must have been created by perfection

If you actually read through all that, I have finally come to my point. Satan is less than God. God doubts nothing, and knows all. God is therefore perfect. God is greater than satan. God created satan. Satan is therefore imperfect. Being imperfect, satan cannot create life. Also, an important point to remember is that impefection may include everything physical, but it is not excluded to the physical. Anything without all knowledge, physical or spiritual, is imperfect. Hence the imperfection of angels.

Reminder

Er, that was just addressed...

Ok, cool, sorry about that. I'm tired as a monkey (or something).



I don't think that's possible. You're saying it's possible for 'entities' to turn away from a state of absolute, universal, immense bliss and peace and wellbeing. Not a single reason is good enough to justify this. If this bliss and heavenly peace are exactly what you claim they are, you'd just bask in the Absolute Perfection. The thought of defecting wouldn't even cross your mind, exactly because of the ideal nature of this bliss.

Your thought process would be: mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm with smiley faces that the available set of smilies can't even begin to approximate.

I don't recall the Bible ever saying angels are in some sort of immense state of bliss...

So being in heaven doesn't induce a state of happiness and bliss? That seems depressing after all the build-up from religions all over the world.

I'm hardly an expert on the subject, but from what I understand, heaven is paradise for us, not for angels. And even if it were, it would be their natural state of being; It is often said that you can't appreciate the good times unless you experience the bad. My reasoning would be that Satan and his followers took heaven for granted, because they couldn't fully appreciate it's wonders.

In any case, angels are God's servants (with humans being God's children). In our world, it's not uncommon for a servant to try to overthrow his master.

Like I said, though, I'm hardly an expert, so I don't really know for certain. This is just guesswork based off what I do know.

God and the Devil are creations of humans symbolising the inherent good and evil in themselves.

Instead of believing in something else that may "save my eternal soul", I choose to believe in myself instead of something that may or may not exist - I have no evidence to say it does.

The object of your belief and faith is not what is important, it is the belief and faith that you hold is.

Proof denies faith, for if God appeared to everyone on Earth now, how many would deny him? How many people would have their self destroyed knowing that there is something watching everything you do, and asking for your worship? (The Jesus Incident, for those who have read it)

At least, this is my belief.

:/ So what did these angels do wrong for them not to deserve heaven?

So let me get this straight.

Because of my evil, Mr. X has the opportunity to be rightous.

That means that I am just as responsible for his rightousness as he is. Without me (evil in general), he couldn't be righteous.

It's a two-way street.

Since I couldn't be evil without righteousness in the world, then the righteous are just as responsible for evil as the evil.

So, I can only come to the conclusion that good and evil coexisting is just as pointless (as you put it) as only good or only evil existing, which fits very nicely into that whole moral relativism thing.

It's FREE to the LANCER!

Yes, it's good to be back.

[QUOTE=Darth Evad]there must be a satan for there to be a god. without satan (evil) then how would you define good (and don't give me websters or wikipedia :p )?[/QUOTE]

I would say that good is whatever you think good is and evil is whatever you think evil is, since both are relative to the individual.

Ask 6 billion people what set of actions are good and you will get 6 billion different answers.