Philosophy Now Forum

Think about it. He constantly gets mentioned as representation and personification of all evil and gets all the blame. And what's the most evil thing he's done? Keep 10 people that GOD let him to kill cause he was unsatisfied with them. He's supposed to be a malevolent adversary but comes off as a hero. Consider the following:

- He takes in god's unwanted children and provides them with a warm welcome and a warm place to stay. And considering how many scientists are probably in hell right now, they probably even have air conditioning so it's presumably very cozy.
- He is the only one who dared to oppose Yahweh's merciless tyranny, the tyranny of a supposedly OMNIPOTENT, OMNISCIENT guy. Talk about Satan being a fucking badass to stand up to the ultimate bully.
- He gave knowledge to humanity and payed a price for it, sacrificing himself for humanity. Kind of like Prometheus.
- He tried to trick Jesus and prevent him from brainwashing masses into becoming braindead religious sheep serving Jesus's father, the evil tyrant.

So there's a clear dissonance between what Satan does and how he is described. His deeds are relatively good and moral. And he is described as if he was the worst being in the universe.

Now let's look at Yahweh. He's constantly described as good and attributed traits such as kindness, fairness, perfection, benevolence, mercy, holiness blah blah. But if you actually look at what he does, he's actually an egoistic, insecure, capricious, sadistic, psychopathic, racist, sexist, homophobic asshole who only cares about people worshiping him and has killed about 2 and a half million people.

So Satan is actually the hero and Yahweh is the villain. I finally see the truth and the hidden message of the bible: Never only focus on what is said - for anything can be said. Focus on what people do cause then they reveal their true nature and intentions. Have no prejudices, don't be a blind/deaf sheep and think critically.

All praise Satan, our hero and savior!

There are two trinities in opposition:

HOLY TRINITY VS. UNHOLY TRINITY
Holy Spirit vs. Satan
Jesus Christ vs. False Prophet
Ouzo Cross vs. Beast

In English gematria simplex (A-1, B-2, C-3, etc.), Holy Spirit equals 151, Jesus Christ equals 151 and Ouzo Cross equals 151. If Satan takes the place of the Ouzo Cross, the total adds up to "The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse." It's all allegorical, my friend, and the details can be found in "The Ouzo Prophecy" at http://church-of-ouzo.com/pdf/ouzo-prophecy.pdf.

bobvenson Dude, don't compare Satan to Jesus. Satan is much cooler. Jesus only got crucified, and he resurrected anyway. Satan got condemned to eternal torture in hell.

3Sum wrote:bobvenson Dude, don't compare Satan to Jesus. Satan is much cooler. Jesus only got crucified, and he resurrected anyway. Satan got condemned to eternal torture in hell.

I'm afraid you wouldn't recognize an allegory if it bit you in the ass.

Satan is God's fall guy, the pawn, the one who makes everyone learn a lesson, like Scooby and Shaggy in Scooby Doo mysteries. If you ask me he's merely a literary device, an antagonist, because no Angel fallen or not could be that stupid. He's basically always doing what God wants him to do, stumbling around playing the fool, and ending up with egg on his face, although he may or may not get a large sandwich or a Scooby snack for the effort, who knows.

Take Judas, he had to do what he did, the message literally would not as been half as effective if he didn't, in fact it might well of been ignored:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9_1RFAcjMU

But does he get any thanks for it.

If you ask me he's merely a literary device, an antagonist, because no Angel fallen or not could be that stupid.

Well I agree that god couldn't be that stupid to design Satan in a way that he would turn against him. So another moral of the story is that god doesn't exist and Sweet Lawd Satan does, another hidden message in the bible I managed to interpret. If you think otherwise, you wrong, cause my interpretation of the bible is the right one.

Judas was a brave man. He exposed Jesus for the fraud he was. Another fearless hero, worthy of Satan.

I'm afraid you wouldn't recognize an allegory if it bit you in the ass.

Keep up that language in Satan's thread and Satan's friend, His Noodliness, Flying Spaghetti Monster will ravage your ass with his large, hard, saucy Noodles until you experience anal prolapse and bleeding.

Please don't use FSMs name in vain, it offends me.

What he's trying to say is what most Christians who are not a little crazy are trying to say the stories in much of the first five books are allegories, it changes of course when Jesus H Shaft comes on the scene then some are allegories or lessons wrapped up in analogy. But until then an allegory is just a story not literally true. That said though Judas's betrayal of Jesus is true, and is not an allegory. Mind you have you read The non canonical Gospel of Judas, seems Jesus came to him and told him to betray him. But then you can't let stuff like that get in or it undermines the message so ultimately Judas is evil and we are saved.

Was Judas approached by Jesus and asked to teach man a valuable lesson? Well we can not know, did he even exist, well that we also can not know. But we can know that these sorts of stories, allegorical or not only work if it goes as it goes without books the Catholics failed to copy or outright destroyed muddying the picture.

Blaggard that's exactly my problem and more or less the point of this thread.

Bible is too prone to interpretation which leads to many people having different interpretations and since not all of them can be correct, most of them (possibly all) will be misinterpretations and only 1 can be correct. People can interpret it any way they want, as I showed in this thread.

Blaggard wrote: If you ask me he's merely a literary device, an antagonist, because no Angel fallen or not could be that stupid.

I'll take this is a breach of the subject of fallen angels. Happen you be familiar with the Book of Enoch?

3Sum wrote:Blaggard that's exactly my problem and more or less the point of this thread.

Bible is too prone to interpretation which leads to many people having different interpretations and since not all of them can be correct, most of them (possibly all) will be misinterpretations and only 1 can be correct. People can interpret it any way they want, as I showed in this thread.

Oh I know but it has to be said...

Kuznetzova wrote:

Blaggard wrote: If you ask me he's merely a literary device, an antagonist, because no Angel fallen or not could be that stupid.

I'll take this is a breach of the subject of fallen angels. Happen you be familiar with the Book of Enoch?

Not canonical so doesn't count except to some Jews and they don't count 'cause they killed Jesus and which, and by which I don't mean their related tribes of Israel 2000 years or so ago, I mean them personally done it. Although technically it was the Romans who killed Jesus, they (the Jews who as we all know are not separate people just one gestalt of a race and religion done it) fitted him up good and proper, done up like a kipper and so on.

Ok to be serious Enoch does read like some wild fantasy, it has nephilim it has some odd tales of the fall and I can see why the Nicene council did not include it, that said they shouldn't of included most of it anyway, as most of it is fairly dubious historically ( which to be fair they weren't to know at the time); there were no walls around Jericho in the time period mention, Jeremaiah did not destroy the 31 cities of AI killing every man woman and child 'cause God said so, excavation sites show the granaries and other buildings in the area were untouched and there was no sign whatsoever of any military conflict or the evidence there of, such as mass graves and burnt areas, suggesting many cities peacefully aquiesed and were spared. There is no record of Jews ever living or being enslaved in Egypt, despite all other peoples who were taken as prizes during wars being mentioned. The list is endless, as always artitistic license, the victor writes the history and he is biased. Even the new testament which is more recent and hence should be less prone to error has some monumentally large errors in it, not just in historical terms, but it directly contradicts itself even in The Gospels, so did Jesus appear after he was risen before all his disciples 3, or just Mary Magdellene? And I wont bore you with more but there are many. Gospel my ass.

Hmm.. I think these are all good reasons for claiming that the original Israelites were a priestly class within the upper echelons of the Canaanite government. That geographic region in the Levant was never that densely populated. Not nearly as much as Babylon was, or Hattusas was.