Is Satan really a bad person?

[salsafan 10]

THIS thread was actually doing pretty well, without any arguing, until now.

 

I will try to salvage it by building on one of Salsafan's points:

Some people take the bible metaphorically and SOME take it literally. Some do a bit of both. Even if we take Satan (putting a literal or metaphoric God aside) as a metaphor for the "evil" side in us, do we really HAVE an evil side? (assuming that evil as a force exists) or is evil itself just a metaphor for decisions made from other experiences/factors/influences in life? ie, an abusive upbringing etc.

 

You are absolutely taking the mick. No arguing or fighting? Oh my gosh. If people stand up and leave the thread, then that is their indicator. If some people who thinks so differently than the way you do, also do not even remotely enter this thread, they too are making a statement. So, there were a lot of people b!tching about someone else leaving, cos they have been harassed off the thread maybe ? Being obtuse and challenging for the sake of it? Yet, you call this as "wanting to know" the difference? I mean, are you for real ?

 

The way you "question" others on personal subjects like religion, and continuously questioning, than asking in a polite manner, is also indeed challenging.

 

FYI, there is the intent of someone, and then there is the action and interpretation of someone else on the receiving end. Since you never and have not put yourself into the shoes of the other person to explain and to carry on the subject, exactly what do you expect? If one presumes you already know the subject, then why discuss? Yet, one also presumes that you should have some ideas on the subject, instead of being obtuse for obtuse sake.

Edited September 21, 2011 by salsafan

[salsafan 10]

Just which of my posts exactly have you interpreted all this from? I'm not asking for another essay, just some post numbers.

 

This is how you are seen to someone else who is different to yourself, and who is more empathetic than you are a rationalist and who do not deduce and break every point down to its supposed logical desire. i.e. your desire.

[RootsBooster 24]

This is how you are seen to someone else who is different to yourself, and who is more empathetic than you are a rationalist and who do not deduce and break every point down to its supposed logical desire. i.e. your desire.

 

I take it that you didn't find a post then.

[Karis 11]

I take it that you didn't find a post then.

 

No, and I think your point was pretty well made, too...

[salsafan 10]

I take it that you didn't find a post then.

 

I was not quoting you to tell you. I was writing to tell you my thoughts on the matter. As you claim that you do not understand it. I claim that I do understand it.

 

The concept of being a Satan, having Satanic thoughts are simple. Take a good example of how we interact. You insult me, and you also b!tch about me, in my worldview, that is acting in an evil way. There is prove, it exists, it happened. Yet, if that went through your mindset and it was filtered out. Why and how you cannot put yourself in my shoes, from my viewpoint, and stop and think? By not writing, or responding with anger, is stopping Satan from taking hold of your thought process, and then you exerting onto the world in verbal form.

 

IF you do that, and compute, and think in a way which is more balanced, and possibly Godly (i.e. checking whether she had a point or not, and from where she is standing, whether she is right or not), then in some sense, you have fought off the evil thoughts, and suggestion by your Satan (or dark Self).

 

You have to remember that you said that you are trying to understand others, and here I am, being one of these others who do understand, accepts and acknowledges spirituality is saying to you, but all you can do, is to fight back. That is also the issue here. Freud explains this pretty well. That each person has an Ego. Plus they can live in their Shadow too. (Which is possibly where Satan resides.)

[RootsBooster 24]

I was not quoting you to tell you. I was writing to tell you my thoughts on the matter. As you claim that you do not understand it. I claim that I do understand it.

 

The concept of being a Satan, having Satanic thoughts are simple. Take a good example of how we interact. You insult me, and you also b!tch about me, in my worldview, that is acting in an evil way. There is prove, it exists, it happened. Yet, if that went through your mindset and it was filtered out. Why and how you cannot put yourself in my shoes, from my viewpoint, and stop and think? By not writing, or responding with anger, is stopping Satan from taking hold of your thought process, and then you exerting onto the world in verbal form.

 

IF you do that, and compute, and think in a way which is more balanced, and possibly Godly (i.e. checking whether she had a point or not, and from where she is standing, whether she is right or not), then in some sense, you have fought off the evil thoughts, and suggestion by your Satan (or dark Self).

 

You have to remember that you said that you are trying to understand others, and here I am, being one of these others who do understand, accepts and acknowledges spirituality is saying to you, but all you can do, is to fight back. That is also the issue here. Freud explains this pretty well. That each person has an Ego. Plus they can live in their Shadow too. (Which is possibly where Satan resides.)

 

Where have I insulted you or bitched? Trying to merely defend myself in a civilised manner does not count as insulting or bitching.

 

Furthermore where on this thread has there been any arguing? Do you understand the concept of discussional forums?

[salsafan 10]

Where have I insulted you or bitched? Trying to merely defend myself in a civilised manner does not count as insulting or bitching.

 

Furthermore where on this thread has there been any arguing? Do you understand the concept of discussional forums?

Try 751, 2.... onwards. You could have left it, nipped it in the bud, but you did not. Talking behind someone's back is also considered as b!tchy in some books. Sorry, talking badly in front of them, rather. (I did read the threads.)

 

Ok. Right. I do not want to fight with you, but as you asked.

 

Please read my posts, and understand what I was saying, give some courtesy and give it time to understand and internalise what I wrote from my perspective, and wear MY hat for once. Not your own, but my hat. I am often pretty moral in my decisions and viewpoints.

 

History of flow. What caused what to happen ? Who was the offensive, and who was the defensive ?

 

I joined and wrote post 742. I said I agree with those points. (Cos I knew that those who were rationalists won't understand it in their terms if it was not paraphrased in another way for them to understand it.)

 

Post 743. I took that as an obtuse comment. Shouldn't it be that simple? The answer is YES ! God and Satan in the spiritual sense are just mere concepts, metaphors, ideas, theory. Man uses it to think "is this good, or is this bad". That is all.

 

Post 744, I genuinely was trying to talk to you.

 

Post 746 - Why the sulking? Why the skepticisms? I was talking in a general sense, and you took that so personally. There are many other people that are similar in thinking in a rational way, on topics that cannot be rationalised to the tee.

 

747 - Anyhow, as you took it personally, I too took it personally from this point onwards, as you responded.

 

748 - I try to detach the personal angle from that and went back to being more general about the subject.

 

749 - I was so annoyed at this point, cos you seem to be so obtuse on the subject. I can say that I was so frustrated that you do not seem to understand it at all. Then I also felt I had to defend myself on my posts and approach. I threw in other ideas to make you understand the difference between yourself, your thought process, and me and my thought process.

 

750 - I do not get that. Why did you assume that I was there to challenge you ? If you read some of my post, it was both with intent to make you understand, and annoyance at some of your obtusiveness. You were so oblivious to the very obvious, which is really annoying. I could've responded to you and ask daft questions like, "do you know what is an apple", just to be mean, and force your thought process down a different way.

 

751,2.... those posts between yourself and Karis was not exactly welcoming, is it ?

 

Discussional forum - Yes, I understand what it means. However, it is very obvious to me when I read through some of the posts on this thread that, there were deliberate obtusiveness for the sake of logical deduction or whatever on someone else's words, and took it wrongly, and therefore threw the supposed "discussion" out of the window.

 

To me, from someone who is more empathetic, doing so, is absolutely rude and obtuse. Cos why would you take something out of context? The subject itself is not a logical one and can be deducted anyhow. Most people interprets it and uses it as a way to define one's life path. Exactly why would anyone not see the most obvious ?

[Karis 11]

those posts between yourself and Karis was not exactly welcoming, is it ?

 

Oh, I thought I was being really clear. I long gave up trying to have a reasoned discussion with you. You twist the situation to suit your needs, you're painfully argumentative, you're outrageously confrontational, you're *never* wrong, and you behave innappropriately.

 

I think that was really pretty clear. If I thought for one second you'd have a moment of humility and see a glimmer if sense I'd pursue it; but I reckon there's no hope.

 

But, by all means: continue to make 'friends' on the forum

[ledbacklight 10]

http://www.bornagainpagan.com/other/017-god-v-satan.jpg

[sccsux 10]

Interpreting religious texts literally is a very common method used by non-religious people to make fun of religions.

 

Interpreting religious texts literally is also very common amongst religious bigots to try and gain advantages.

 

surely that is a good demonstration of one's "Satanic" side of him or her ?

 

Nope. It's simply a part of their personality. Nothing to do with being "satanic".

 

Nobody is claiming that everything written within it, is factual truth and it happened in history.

 

Many religious people try to claim that their flavour of religion is historically accurate.

 

Try 751, 2.... onwards.

 

All of which occurred after you had decided to stick your oar in. Until you did, there was no real argument on this thread. It is you that is responsible for the introduction of bickering and narrow mindedness.

[salsafan 10]

http://www.bornagainpagan.com/other/017-god-v-satan.jpg

 

Oh, we may as well use proper stats like self proclaimed religious individuals, and lump those into the mix as well, and forget that rationalists and non-believers hold no responsibility to the world's ills in any way shape or form at all.

[RootsBooster 24]

Try 751, 2.... onwards. You could have left it, nipped it in the bud, but you did not. Talking behind someone's back is also considered as b!tchy in some books. Sorry, talking badly in front of them, rather. (I did read the threads.)

 

Ok. Right. I do not want to fight with you, but as you asked.

 

Please read my posts, and understand what I was saying, give some courtesy and give it time to understand and internalise what I wrote from my perspective, and wear MY hat for once. Not your own, but my hat. I am often pretty moral in my decisions and viewpoints.

 

History of flow. What caused what to happen ? Who was the offensive, and who was the defensive ?

 

I joined and wrote post 742. I said I agree with those points. (Cos I knew that those who were rationalists won't understand it in their terms if it was not paraphrased in another way for them to understand it.)

 

Post 743. I took that as an obtuse comment. Shouldn't it be that simple? The answer is YES ! God and Satan in the spiritual sense are just mere concepts, metaphors, ideas, theory. Man uses it to think "is this good, or is this bad". That is all.

 

Post 744, I genuinely was trying to talk to you.

 

Post 746 - Why the sulking? Why the skepticisms? I was talking in a general sense, and you took that so personally. There are many other people that are similar in thinking in a rational way, on topics that cannot be rationalised to the tee.

 

747 - Anyhow, as you took it personally, I too took it personally from this point onwards, as you responded.

 

748 - I try to detach the personal angle from that and went back to being more general about the subject.

 

749 - I was so annoyed at this point, cos you seem to be so obtuse on the subject. I can say that I was so frustrated that you do not seem to understand it at all. Then I also felt I had to defend myself on my posts and approach. I threw in other ideas to make you understand the difference between yourself, your thought process, and me and my thought process.

 

750 - I do not get that. Why did you assume that I was there to challenge you ? If you read some of my post, it was both with intent to make you understand, and annoyance at some of your obtusiveness. You were so oblivious to the very obvious, which is really annoying. I could've responded to you and ask daft questions like, "do you know what is an apple", just to be mean, and force your thought process down a different way.

 

751,2.... those posts between yourself and Karis was not exactly welcoming, is it ?

 

Discussional forum - Yes, I understand what it means. However, it is very obvious to me when I read through some of the posts on this thread that, there were deliberate obtusiveness for the sake of logical deduction or whatever on someone else's words, and took it wrongly, and therefore threw the supposed "discussion" out of the window.

 

To me, from someone who is more empathetic, doing so, is absolutely rude and obtuse. Cos why would you take something out of context? The subject itself is not a logical one and can be deducted anyhow. Most people interprets it and uses it as a way to define one's life path. Exactly why would anyone not see the most obvious ?

 

These posts all happened AFTER you joined, like I said, up until that point the thread was doing well. So I was right. Why do you interpret rational discussion as being obtuse?