"Satan doesnt want people talking about God."

[Ian]

Is that really true? Why is the bible STILL the most widely published book in history? More bibles are printed in one year than the all time sales of a New Your Times best seller.

And how many of those are forced down peoples' throats? How many are SOLD? (Indicating people actually want them.) AND, the best question, are ANY of them being read?

Lots of them are placed in hotel rooms by Gideons, where they are ignored by travellers from all corners of the world.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Is that really true? Why is the bible STILL the most widely published book in history? More bibles are printed in one year than the all time sales of a New Your Times best seller.

And how many of those are forced down peoples' throats? How many are SOLD? (Indicating people actually want them.) AND, the best question, are ANY of them being read?

Lots of them are placed in hotel rooms by Gideons, where they are ignored by travellers from all corners of the world.

I give them "special" attention.

[Ian]

Is that really true? Why is the bible STILL the most widely published book in history? More bibles are printed in one year than the all time sales of a New Your Times best seller.

And how many of those are forced down peoples' throats? How many are SOLD? (Indicating people actually want them.) AND, the best question, are ANY of them being read?

Lots of them are placed in hotel rooms by Gideons, where they are ignored by travellers from all corners of the world.

I give them "special" attention.

You don't have to do that, y'know. Hotels rooms all come with complimentary toilet paper.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Is that really true? Why is the bible STILL the most widely published book in history? More bibles are printed in one year than the all time sales of a New Your Times best seller.

And how many of those are forced down peoples' throats? How many are SOLD? (Indicating people actually want them.) AND, the best question, are ANY of them being read?

Lots of them are placed in hotel rooms by Gideons, where they are ignored by travellers from all corners of the world.

I give them "special" attention.

You don't have to do that, y'know. Hotels rooms all come with complimentary toilet paper.

How about condoms?

[Ayaan]

Is that really true? Why is the bible STILL the most widely published book in history? More bibles are printed in one year than the all time sales of a New Your Times best seller.

And how many of those are forced down peoples' throats? How many are SOLD? (Indicating people actually want them.) AND, the best question, are ANY of them being read?

Lots of them are placed in hotel rooms by Gideons, where they are ignored by travellers from all corners of the world.

I would venture a guess that very few of the bibles sold are ever read.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Two priests were talking about their personal concepts of Hell.

"Hell is eternal torment and suffering."

"No, Hell is a place were everyone is male!"

"And how would you consider THAT to be Hell?"

"They're all over 12 years old and know how to fight."

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Three gay men arrive at Heaven. (Where did you think they would go?) They decide to split up and check out the "action". When they meet up again later they report what they've found.

"I've found out EXACTLY why they call him St. PETER!"

"Oh? Well, I've just been with Gabriel, blowing his horn."

"You bitches ain't shit. Mine eyes have seen the glory of the cumming of the Lord."

[Coito ergo sum]

Five pages ! No WAY!

Does it make any strategic sense for satan (or some other opponent of God) to actively promote the cause of theological discussion?

Yes it does. The more people think about theology and the more they read the religious texts, the more likely it is that they will realize it's false.

Is that really true? Why is the bible STILL the most widely published book in history? More bibles are printed in one year than the all time sales of a New Your Times best seller.

Most people don't read them, at least that's what I've found. I owned four Bibles before I read one of them (other than being directed to passages in church, which is quite different than actually reading and thinking about it).

Is it not counter-intuitive for New Atheism to stir up a renewed interest in God and religion in the hope that the more people talking about God the better it will be for atheists in the long run? Where is the logic in running an anti-theist polemic which jolts every single apathetic arm-chair apologist wannabe into action?

Because more people will see the light.

The light of non-stamp collecting?

The light of truth.

The light of science which is revealing that reality consists of concepts (theories) that are more bizarre than anything in the bible.

The Bible is not true. I don't care if it's bizarre or not. Reality is reality.

Worm holes? Parallel universes? Quantum weirdness? Holograms?

None of the foregoing is expected to be believed on faith.

How many Hindus and Norse Thor worshippers and Wiccans and New Agers and Native/Aboriginal Religionists are teaming up with Jews, Muslims and Christians to say - hell YES Mr Hitchens, we WOULD like to talk publicly to you about "religion".

Some.

Because I think Mr Hitchens walked into the wrong bar to pick a fight.

Lion (IRC)[/color][/b]

It is only by not thinking that people can be suckered by the snake-oil salesmen that are the religiosos in this world. The Bible is a great catalyst to atheism. I've talked to many, many people who were once Christians, but when they finally started really reading and thinking about the Bible, they realized it could not be true.

How does a person perform the mental fuction you describe as "not thinking"?

That was sort of a short hand way of saying that people don't really critically think about their religion. It's fed to them, and they accept it based on "feeling."

I cant see any point in duelling anecdotes about the many many many people I have "talked to" and what they would say (if they were here) to the many many many people you have talked to but as for myself, reading the bible has not been a catalyst even to agnosticism let alone atheism.

I'd be happy to engage in an in depth discussion about the Bible and any verses you like. However you would like to approach it is your call (if at all). I'd love to know what about the Bible you find particularly persuasive. Is it the fact that it didn't even exist as a single book until the late 4th century? Is it that the Emperor Constantine organized the disparate Christian sect leaders of the time and compelled them to put together one canon? Or, is it the fact that there were many Gospels followed and held to be canonical by a variety of churches around the Mediterranean, and that the books of the New Testament that were included were included by a vote of various church leaders (and those that were excluded were excluded by vote)? And, is it that the ones that were excluded were branded as heresy, and suppressed?

What do you make of the fact that a billion Catholics follow one Bible, and the Protestants follow a Bible that has five fewer books? Are both of those Bible versions "true?"

What about the fact that the four Gospels conflict? That there are two separate creation stories in Genesis that were combined, and which order the steps of creation differently? What about the competing 10 Commandments in the book of Exodus - two different sets of 10 Commandments?

Is it persuasive because the Books of Moses were supposedly written by Moses, but at the same time contain descriptions of his death? He wrote those passages posthumously?

Is it the man surviving inside a fish for several days? Taking snakes? Talking donkeys? The actual reference to "witches" actually existing? The reference to "dragons" and "unicorns" actually existing?

What about the whole "Noah's Flood" story? Take that "literally" do ya?

And, what about the "great moral lessons?" If god told you to kill your child, would you? Would you dash the brains of the Midianite and Amalekyte children out on the rocks too? Do you think it's right that if you call a prophet "baldy" that bears should come and tear you to pieces?

If you accept the Bible, that's up to you. It's not through reason and critical thinking, though. That's for sure.

[charlou]

I have a question ...

And, Satan told us the truth about the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. God is the one who lied about it.

God said if you eat from that tree you will die.

Satan said no you wont die.
Guess what? Adam and Eve DID die

Like, 900 years later. The verse is as follows: "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Genesis 2:17 - King James (Authorized) Version.

IN THE DAY THAT THOU EATEST..... Adam and Eve most certainly did not die in the day that they ate the fruit. God lied.

He didn't say, "you'll die at some point." Or, "you will become mortal." He said they would die that day.

So, one, for the Biblical literalists out there - obviously, that can't be taken literally. The only way one can find God here to be right is to make it some sort of metaphor, or a non-literal statement that by "day" he didn't really mean "day" he meant - at some point hundreds of years in the future.

If you don't follow the KJV, then the New American Standard Bible says it thusly, " 17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it (A)you will surely die."

English Standard Version, "17but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil(A) you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat[a] of it you(B) shall surely die."

Darby Translation: 17but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt certainly die.

New International Version: 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." (The NIV uses "when" not "in the day" - so, so much for "God's Word never changes"). But, alas, Adam and Eve did not die WHEN they ate the fruit, they died 900 years later. LOL, after long lives and children and all that.

Where's the bit where "Satan said no you wont die" ?

[JimC]

And here is another thing. Modern liberal theologians are very fond of the line that god has given us free will, so we can make an honest choice between following him and rejecting evil, or go the other way, and become Ratz... :twisted:

They always imply we are not little automatons...

One would think that a knowledge of good and evil is required to make such an important decision...

Wouldn't one?

But I can hear the chorus already - it's just an allegory!

There is one profession that cannot be in short supply.

Cherry-picking...

[MrFungus420]

Hi MrFungus420,
Thanks for helping to keep the thread alive.
I am only half awake so I cant manage the quote function as well as you.
Please consider my comments in bold red
Lion (IRC)

@MrFungus420 - I would not have believed this thread would make 4 pages. Clearly, I dont have any powers of precognition when it comes to the willingness of atheists to engage in theology debates. All to often the debate goes on for hours and hours and THEN the atheist says...."theres no God - so I win"

Where have I done that? Could this possibly be a hasty generalization?

No - just a comment about people who say 1. Theres no God and 2. I hate him. This thread is about a theological proposition. Whats the value in a contribution which says "theres no God, theres no satan"? If you think that, go visit the "Satan doesnt exist thread" This is the "What would satan do" thread.

No...it's about the proposition that Satan doesn't want people talking about God.

I've been pointing out that there could be some very good reasons that Satan would want people talking about God and the Bible. The more people that talk about it, especially those who don't believe it, the more people are going to see the vacuity of the claims of God's existence. That means fewer believers "for" God and more unbelievers "for" Satan.

"I do not believe in your god. I do not believe in the stories in your Bible. That means that I cannot take the Biblical descriptions of Hell literally because I do not believe that it is a literal place."

Lion IRC did NOT write...."I do not believe in your god. I do not believe in the stories in your Bible. That means that..." Maybe we both have trouble with the quote function.

Sorry. I missed correcting that quote of yours when I replied to it. In other words, no. You fucked up the quote function and, despite my attempted diligence, I missed correcting it.

So, to get back to that, the above quote, "I do not believe in your god. I do not believe in the stories in your Bible. That means that I cannot take the Biblical descriptions of Hell literally because I do not believe that it is a literal place.", was stated by you as my point. It was not, it was, as I said:

That was an answer to your specific question about my taking the Biblical description of Hell literally.

Game over - thanks for playing.

Still leaving unanswered the point about inflicting an infinite punishment for a finite offense (including simply not loving God).

Once again, this is the WWSD thread.

Sorry. That was a bit of a tangent. However, that is one of the points that Satan could want people discuss. It points out such an incredible injustice from a supposedly benevolent being from whom all morals and laws flow. It is something that will make some people doubt God's existence.

I would love to debate the hell/punishment thing with you but I must ask you...whats the point if you are going to end up saying..."oh well theres no God anyway so you lose"

Well, since I don't claim to know that there is no god, why would I do that?

I am trying to point out flaws in your ideas, you are protesting about what you think I am going to say or do. And you have already demonstrated, in this very thread that you abilities of prognostication are less than accurate.

So, instead of complaining about what I haven't said, how about addressing what I have said?

And the point that the reason that I do not believe in God is because there is no evidence to cause me to believe it.

And the point that, the reason that, I do not believe that, is because nothing that, causes me to believe that....err...um...I lost my train of thought....what?

Thank you for again demonstrating how well thought out your position is.
Thank you for again demonstrating how well you deal with arguments.

And its corollary that since God knows that there are people who cannot believe without evidence, he is condemning them to eternal punishment by not supplying them the requisite evidence.

I must argue the opposite of this claim. Sorry.
A) I assert that there IS evidence

What is it? Never mind.

The point was requisite evidence. That would be the evidence required to convince me that God does exist.

B) God knows that, given free will, there are some humans who will NOT accept a "celestial dictatorship" even WITH evidence.

So what?

There are also those who would accept the evidence, and believe in God. That doesn't mean that they would automatically choose to love him. But they would then at least be able to use their free-will to make the choice of whether to love him in all of His Divine and Holy Glory or despise him as a Brutal and Megolomaniacal Celestial Despot.

Knowledge is not a hindrance to free-will, it is a prerequisite for it.

[MrFungus420]

And, Satan told us the truth about the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. God is the one who lied about it.

God said if you eat from that tree you will die.

Not quite. God told Adam that he would die "in the day" that he ate the forbidden fruit.

Satan said no you wont die.
Guess what? Adam and Eve DID die

Guess what? Adam and Eve did NOT die the day that they ate the forbidden fruit, the day that God said that they would die.
Yes, they did die...about 9 centuries later.

Want to get into just a little more?

Why did the Serpent tell Eve that God didn't want them to eat the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?

Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

And, guess what God's reason was for banishing Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden?

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden...

Looks like the Serpent again told the truth.

See, Satan would want people talking about this. It may not convince you, but this is the sort of thing that can start people questioning their religion.

[MrFungus420]

The light of non-stamp collecting? The light of science which is revealing that reality consists of concepts (theories) that are more bizarre than anything in the bible. Worm holes? Parallel universes? Quantum weirdness? Holograms?

How's that shoe leather taste?

http://www.google.com/search?client=ope ... 8&oe=utf-8

You can buy holographic equipment; projectors, etc.

[Feck]

B) God knows that, given free will, there are some humans who will NOT accept a "celestial dictatorship" even WITH evidence.

Now ask yourself why ? Are we expected,even if we believe the ghost written autobiography of this Raging Vengeful Psychopath and placidly believe that despite ALL evidence to the contrary He only hurts us when we upset him (domestic abuse victims please take note)to love him ? Be scared of him ,be terrified of hell maybe but love and worship him ? NO FUCKING WAY I have more SPINE !

From the first book to the last book your Babble is a horror story How you manage to cherry-pick a loving caring fount of truth and knowledge and a just basis for an ethical code for humans from this is truly a fucking miracle .

I will say it again to state that rational sensible argument ,linked to our free will (another day, another subject you are confused about )is what your God wants(because if we talk about god enough we will believe???? ) and that Hitch has stirred up a hornets nest of Believers against atheism is a joke (not a funny one) they won't pause to take a breath and listen, they are so busy killing each other for the sake of Gods fucking LOVE

The smug fucking arrogance of the theists saying "ah well you may disagree with us ,but at least you are talking about God "
MAKES ME WANT TO VOMIT

I could write a paper pointing out that unicorns must have thicker necks and smaller brains than horsesBUT UNICORNS don't exist
I do not care that in times of emotional stress You feel better talking to one ,I do not care if thousands of people have died for unicorns .UNICORNS don't exist.

[Coito ergo sum]

I have a question ...

And, Satan told us the truth about the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge. God is the one who lied about it.

God said if you eat from that tree you will die.

Satan said no you wont die.
Guess what? Adam and Eve DID die

Like, 900 years later. The verse is as follows: "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Genesis 2:17 - King James (Authorized) Version.

IN THE DAY THAT THOU EATEST..... Adam and Eve most certainly did not die in the day that they ate the fruit. God lied.

He didn't say, "you'll die at some point." Or, "you will become mortal." He said they would die that day.

So, one, for the Biblical literalists out there - obviously, that can't be taken literally. The only way one can find God here to be right is to make it some sort of metaphor, or a non-literal statement that by "day" he didn't really mean "day" he meant - at some point hundreds of years in the future.

If you don't follow the KJV, then the New American Standard Bible says it thusly, " 17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it (A)you will surely die."

English Standard Version, "17but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil(A) you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat[a] of it you(B) shall surely die."

Darby Translation: 17but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou eatest of it thou shalt certainly die.

New International Version: 17 but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die." (The NIV uses "when" not "in the day" - so, so much for "God's Word never changes"). But, alas, Adam and Eve did not die WHEN they ate the fruit, they died 900 years later. LOL, after long lives and children and all that.

Where's the bit where "Satan said no you wont die" ?

Genesis 3:

1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"
2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' "

4 "You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman. 5 "For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, "Where are you?"

10 He answered, "I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid."

11 And he said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?"

12 The man said, "The woman you put here with me—she gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it."

13 Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?"
The woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate."

So, look - Eve tells Satan that God said not even to touch the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, or she would surely die. Satan, correctly, says that Eve won't die and that her "eyes will be opened." And, Eve and Adam both ate and true to Satan's word their "eyes were opened!"

God was pissed off. So, Eve threw Satan under the bus and claimed that Satan had deceived her, when as far as she knew Satan was perfectly truthful. Her eyes were opened, and she did not die. On what basis did she claim Satan deceived her?

The answer, NONE!

And, Eve lied to Satan, because God never told Eve or Adam not to touch the fruit of the Tree. He said not to eat it or Eve and Adam would die THAT DAY. Eve added the part about not touching it.

So, Satan was deceived by Eve, and Satan corrected clarified to Eve that she would not die (certainly not that day). Eve and Adam ate, and neither of them died. As far as they knew, they would still never die. So Eve tries to get out of trouble by telling God that Satan deceived her (NIV) or beguiled her (KJV).

And, actually, Genesis refers to the serpent and never says outright that the serpent is Satan. Satan - Lucifer - is an Angel in Heaven. Christians tend to get put Lucifer's fall from heaven out of order. It feels better to have the war in heaven where the Angels are cast out prior to the fall of man in Genesis - because otherwise, Satan is working FROM HEAVEN to supposedly deceive man. However, the war in heaven is not referred to in the Bible until the Book of Revelation when 1/3 of the Angels are cast out. Yet, Revelation, according to Christians, is yet to come. Satan is still in heaven, unless the Book of Revelation has already happened.