EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum

Satan gave man love. Was it worth the hate?

< Return to subforum
Greatest I am
By Greatest I am | Sep 14 2018 12:31 PM
Satan gave man love. Was it worth the hate?

Adam thought so. He instantly and without argument or hesitation ate of that knowledge when Eve offered love to Adam.

Without Satan causing Original Sin, mankind could no know of love or hate as love and hate are subject to being good or evil.

Would you do as Adam did?

Was Satan right in opening our eyes to love and hate?

Should we venerate Satan more than Yahweh who tried to deny mankind love?

By nzlockie | Sep 14 2018 5:51 PM
Greatest I am: I'm not following your logic that:
A) Love and Hate are subject to good and evil.

B) Satan is the cause of original sin.

C) Mankind didn't know Love before soon entered the world.

None of these statements agree with the biblical amount.

To answer your questions anyway though...

1. Possibly. I'm flawed like he was, so it's certainly possible. I'd be more likely to repeat Eve's mistake than Adam's though.

2. Irrelevant, since he didn't do this. If you believe that satan was the serpent, (which it doesn't actually say anywhere) and you believe that his action did open our eyes to love and hate, then the answer is, no. It wasn't right.
Tempting another to sin is never right.

3. No. This doesn't even make sense. According to the biblical account, it was the serpent who brought sin into the world by convincing Eve to break the commandment. Why would we venerate the one who brought sin into the world?
Greatest I am
By Greatest I am | Sep 16 2018 4:31 PM
nzlockie: A) Love and Hate are subject to good and evil.

Simple. Is love good? Usually, but it can also be evil.

B) Satan is the cause of original sin.

Your religion is an offshoot of Judaism and their Yahweh.
Jews do not have an Original Sin concept as they see Eden as Original Virtue. Original sin is a Christian invention and lie.


. C) Mankind didn't know Love before soon entered the world.

Correct. Not till after the serpent pushed A & E to ignore god's stupid command to stay for A & E to stay stupid and with their eyes closed.

None of these statements agree with the biblical amount.

That is because you are reading a Jewish myth with a false Christian interpretation while ignore the better Jewish interpretation.

None of these statements agree with the biblical amount.

Same result. Enlightenment and progress.

Tempting another to sin is never right.

Tempting someone to seek an education, when following a really foul and evil command to stay stupid is benevolence, not a sin.
Only a really stupid dogma would say it was.

it was the serpent who brought sin into the world

You do not know your own bible. Adam's sin is said to have brought death into the world. Not the serpent or Eve. I will let you google that for yourself.

As to Satan being the serpent, Revelation hints that they are the same entity. That or if the serpent was deceiving Eve, and Satan is the great deceiver as scriptures say, then she had to put the deception into the serpent.

The moral; of the story was stupidly reversed by Christianity. What do you see as a fall in man, as god himself says in Gen 3, --- they have become as gods in the knowing of good and evil?

Is that not what scriptures urge us to do when they say to be as perfect as god?


By nzlockie | Sep 18 2018 12:06 AM
Greatest I am: There are so many tenuous links you're making here.
Does this line ever actually work on anyone? Does it even work on YOU?

I feel like you have to stretch everything so far to make this work.

You should simply look at Genesis as a literal account. That's how most Protestant Christians take it, (although obviously there's a significant minority that would disagree with that statement!)
If you do this, there are LOADS of apparent contradictions that you could poke holes in. They would all be more interesting than this.

Quite simply, God IS Love. Adam and Eve both knew God, so therefore they both knew love. The fruit they were forbidden to eat gave them the Knowledge of Good and Evil. That's not the same thing. It's never explained exactly what this knowledge is, or how comprehensively they were able to understand it, but it is often likened to your Conscience. It's also tied into James where it is made clear that an understanding of what is right and wrong is enough to convict a person. In other words, this knowledge means that we become responsible for our actions in a way that a animal would not be.

I'm aware that there are lots of theories that the Serpent in the Garden and the Satan of the New Testament are one and the same. This would actually be a much more interesting debate, since the biblical account would seem to suggest that Lucifer had his falling out with God much later than this garden event. If they are the same being, as Revelation would appear to suggest, why wouldn't God punish Lucifer for this Eden business. Why take it out on the Snakes?
In any case, the most literal interpretation is actually that it was the snake, not Satan. That's how I take it anyway.
This seems like a minor point, but it actually isn't. It's totally related.

Responsibility for Sin is a really big deal in Scripture, and the message is surprisingly consistent.
The perpetrator is always guilty. Sometimes God is merciful and forgives them, but if they are punished as to the letter of the law, then that's just the way it is. One classic example of this that always used to bug me was the guys carrying the Ark of the Convenant, who were killed by God because they disobeyed His direction not to touch it. It always seemed "unfair" because they were only trying to catch it before it fell. But it doesn't matter. The law is the law.

So when Even sinned and ate the fruit, she has no excuse - she's guilty and deserves punishment.
When Adam sinned and ate the fruit, he is just as guilty. It doesn't matter that Eve had already eaten it.
Likewise, when the Serpent sins by tempting Adam and Eve to their sin, he is guilty and gets punished as well.

It doesn't matter if in YOUR opinion, the law was a stupid one, or even if you think it was a law aimed at holding Mankind back from greater good - the law is still the law. Disobedience is never right.

Finally, your last weak-as point was trying to say that since Mankind attains this knowledge of Good and Evil, surely that makes him perfect or God - which is what God wants anyway.
No. The point is that Man now KNOWS the difference between Good and Evil. So it removes all excuse he has for explaining why he continually chooses Evil over Good. He is not Godlike at all, nor does this make him closer to being Godlike.
The New Testament urges us to strive to follow God's commandments - THAT's what they're meaning by trying to be perfect.
Greatest I am
By Greatest I am | Sep 18 2018 2:53 AM
nzlockie: To exercise free will and choose good instead of evil or love over hate, one must know what good and evil and love and hate are. Right?

Your god denied that knowledge and thus denied A & E free will and the knowledge of love and how to love.

Loose some of the supernatural god preaching and come and reason with facts and not an attempt to make me thing you god id love when I see him as a genocidal son murdering demiurge.


By nzlockie | Sep 18 2018 7:39 AM
Greatest I am: Pass. You asked, I answered.

Atheists generally struggle to have a theological debate like this because they can't even pretend to accept the bible as truth. You've just proved that true again.

Find something legitimately tricky if you want to attack the veracity of the bible. Not something that exposes your lack of understanding of basic Christian doctrine.

The genocidal murderer thing is kind of beginner level, but that's a good start.
Greatest I am
By Greatest I am | Sep 18 2018 9:45 PM
nzlockie: I am not an atheist. I am a Gnostic Christian, and if you can ignore that your god is genicidal when he used it, that is on you.

As to the veracity of a myth as truth, you gotta be kidding.

. I hope you can see how intelligent the ancients were as compared to the mental trash that modern preachers and theists are using with the literal reading of myths.




Rabbi Hillel, the older contemporary of Jesus, said that when asked to sum up the whole of Jewish teaching, while he stood on one leg, said, "The Golden Rule. That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the Torah. And everything else is only commentary. Now, go and study it."

Please listen as to what is said about literal reading.

"Origen, the great second or third century Greek commentator on the Bible said that it is absolutely impossible to take these texts literally. You simply cannot do so. And he said, "God has put these sort of conundrums and paradoxes in so that we are forced to seek a deeper meaning."

Matt 7;12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.