Creation vs. Evolution

[deco_martini]

Well, way back in post #5813, while scorning the modern military, he does have a fondness for historical military real heroes. Rather inconsistent, isn't it?

I would be more impressed if his military hero who he tries to feign an intellectual knowledge of wasn't the hero of the action movie "300". That is rather convenient to the point where I wonder if he knew of this person before there was a cool movie where he was a character.

 

[ekremer]

Ah, Lucifer, how art thine voices legion.

Diaboliklos in Greek and Helaal in Hebrew.

Just a clarification, there is no devil, lucifer whatever in the jewish religion. I don't know why he mentioned it but, the old testiment barley talks about the after life, we have no real hell like christians beleive (our version either is you stay as long as you need to forgive yourself, or 12 months depending on who you talk to ) and no mention of a devil.

 

[nereas]

Just a clarification, there is no devil, lucifer whatever in the jewish religion. I don't know why he mentioned it but, the old testiment barley talks about the after life, we have no real hell like christians beleive (our version either is you stay as long as you need to forgive yourself, or 12 months depending on who you talk to ) and no mention of a devil.

You should read more, specifically in the book of Isaiah, one of the major prophets.

 

[nereas]

I think "nereas" has amply demonstrated that he is not stupid (in terms of intellectual capability) but that he is bigoted and has a totally closed mind. He is incapable of reason in any normally accepted sense.

I am not an American and it isn't the British custom to praise and laud our military for "serving us". In most cases they decided to take a job that they expected to enjoy and get well paid at, and they can't be surprised when they encounter the less pleasant aspects of that deal. I also think both the two main theatres of war (Iraq and Afghanistan) are misguided, fraudulent (on the US & British people), and pointless. We will never win either war. Remember that there are British fighting alongside Americans in both places, and I know some of them. I am ex-military myself.

But that in no way belittles what they actually do, and what "nereas" said is insensitive and likely to provoke antipathy. He seems not to know this, which is further evidence that mentally he has divorced himself from reality. I would like to see him put in a truly dangerous situation to see how he would react. He appears not to want to be a part of normal society - a stance he can only adopt because he has the luxury of living in a peaceful country made peaceful by the people he is belittling. Fine, let him look out for himself. He will soon find that his position is in practice untenable.

So there is no point in attempting to reason with him and people like him, and I'm not going to bother any more.

Have you noticed though how he likes to change the words people have used to twist what they have said to his convenience? His introduction of the word "amateur", as in "The amateur scientists, the amateur philosophers, the amateur debaters, and the atheists, all create for themselves a mythical house of cards, and then they throw stones at everyone else's house as being 'unintellectual'." He hopes thereby to degrade what they have said. Just why "amateur" should be regarded as a term of derogation though isn't clear to me. Many great scientists & philosophers have been amateurs, and I don't know of any professional debaters or atheists. Certainly the Oxford scientists I had in mind above are world-level, with many published works.

It is sad though to come across people like "nereas", and I have to say that America is a prime breeding ground for them. He wouldn't last five minutes in Britain - he would be exposed as a fool and a charlatan, and he would find earning a living to be quite difficult.

Nonetheless this thread, or the tiny part I've participated in, has been enjoyable and most revealing.

You imitate Lucifer's false accusations more than anyone else I have ever met. And that is where one of his other names comes from, too, in Hebrew, Ha Shatan, The Accusor.

And if you work in the NFL, I certainly hope you won't quit your day job.

 

[JeffG]

It is sad though to come across people like "nereas", he would be exposed as a fool and a charlatan

He has been exposed here on Scubaboard on diving matters. He has just found a new playground here.

 

[ekremer]

You should read more, specifically in the book of Isaiah, one of the major prophets.

You should respect other faiths more and not try to inject your own into others.

For Jews, anything that even remotely conflicts with the idea that God is One and Indivisible will be rejected because it precludes true, pure, monotheism. The idea that there is a God in heaven above who fights against a god of the underworld, or hell, is not monotheism. Other faiths had this same duality:

 

[peterbj7]

if you work in the NFL

where on earth does this come from ?????

For Jews, anything that even remotely conflicts with the idea that God is One and Indivisible will be rejected because it precludes true, pure, monotheism. The idea that there is a God in heaven above who fights against a god of the underworld, or hell, is not monotheism. Other faiths had this same duality

Well said - I'm not a Jew but even I knew that! But I suspect it's lost on our friend.

 

[Spencermm]

In my 30ish years of being a Christian(no particular denomination) I've never heard the notion that lucifer was/is a god, nor that God "fights" with him. Can't imagine that it would be much of a fight.
I have heard, however, of the notion that God puts him down for the count at some future point.
(I know that there are sects that worship the devil as a god. Seems like there is a church based in Calif. called the First Church of Satan, started by Anton Levee.)

 

[deco_martini]

In my 30ish years of being a Christian(no particular denomination) I've never heard the notion that lucifer was/is a god, nor that God "fights" with him. Can't imagine that it would be much of a fight.
I have heard, however, of the notion that God puts him down for the count at some future point.
(I know that there are sects that worship the devil as a god. Seems like there is a church based in Calif. called the First Church of Satan, started by Anton Levee.)

Do you not find it curious that God lets a renegade angel run loose (or lets him have his own opposite empire of heaven called hell)? God is all seeing but didn't see the fall. God is all powerful but didn't simply snap his fingers and make him disappear. There is definitely an implied duality between God and Satan in Christian mythology. But to reconcile the omnipotence and omnipresence of God, people say "yeah, but he's not as a powerful".

The the Isiah story of Lucifer is actually a reference to a popular Icarus type myth of those times. Lucifer was the greek translation of the idea of "morning star" and it was put into english versions instead of being written as Day star or morning star. The scholarly opinion is that Isiah was comparing some real with the Icarus type myth. However, what do those scholars know? (aside the actual hebrew/greek, the political conditions of those times, and the witness texts these books are derived from)

The serpent in Genesis was an angel named Samael in Hebrew mythology.

In the story of Job, the Satan character is in heaven and is "the adversary" a sort of heavenly prosecutor.

The modern Satan is an amalgam of biblical misunderstandings that conveniently provide a bad guy who carries out the torture of the wicked so that we don't have to imagine God doing it himself.

Unfortunately, modern fundamentalism (as I was raised in) has an intractable need for a Satan character. They defiantly and triumphantly talk about "believing in the devil". One popular phrase was "you may not believe in the devil brother, but he believes in you" usually followed with a not quite diabolical laugh on the part of the preacher. (ham it up brother!) I don't think modern christendom will relinquish the Satan mythology any time soon because its too convenient and without it some sects' reason for being good falls apart.

 

[peterbj7]

Spencermm - surely this is just semantics. If the Devil is a real entity and has a will, which is certainly in accordance with Christian theology, then he/it can be termed a god. Taking "god" as any supernatural personal being that has some effect upon people, which again is consistent with inter alia Christian theology.

Your opening comment intrigues me. Given the profound differences between the numerous different sects of Christianity, and given that the term "I am a Christian" implies adherence to the dogma of one of these sects, how can you be a Christian of uncertain denomination? If you mean that you feel "spiritual" and wish to follow the general moral precepts of Christianity then that's different. Many people have an inner feeling of "morality" and "responsibility", generally attuned to the social culture of their upbringing, but that doesn't make them Christians. If they come from a Christian-dominated culture they might not see much difference, but they could have much the same moral outlook in say a Bhuddist culture, and that wouldn't any more make them Bhuddists.

Enormous numbers of people, the vast bulk of the population in fact, hold deeply felt moral beliefs, which are generally no more than is dictated by a need to exist within a society of other people. These moral obligations are common to pretty well all religions and certainly all monotheistic ones, but were adopted by those religions, not invented by them.