The Original Sin: who is to blame?

[ecco]

Adam and Eve did not commit the original sin.
It was Lucifer who God change his name to Satan the devil that committed the original sin back in the first earth age.

If indeed there was a Lucifer/Satan in the first earth age, then it is clear that God committed the Original Sin by Creating Lucifer/Satan.

 

[dybmh]

If indeed there was a Lucifer/Satan in the first earth age, then it is clear that God committed the Original Sin by Creating Lucifer/Satan.

technically a sin is something which opposes the will of G-d. That is why G-d cannot sin.

It's a small loop hole in your statement. But the spirit of your statement is true. If G-d exists, the buck stops with G-d.

If G-d exists, G-d is responsible for all of this: the good, the bad, and the ugly.

 

[ecco]

That's a cop out. Whether one uses the words 'in the name of atheism,' or 'in the name of the father/motherland" or 'in the name of rationality' or 'because theism and religion are bad and we need to be rid of it,' it is the same thing. They are killing in order to further their cause...which is anti-theism, which is one subset of atheism. Doing it 'in the name of atheism," whether the actual words are used or not.

Read and understand your own words - "further their cause".

For Mao...
Google what were stalins objectives

The Communist Party taught the peasants that the old order of social and economic inequality was not natural, but a perversion caused by the institution of private property. To replace that "feudal" order, the party brought a vision of communal order where all would work together unselfishly for common goals.​

For Stalin...
Google: what were stalins objectives

His motivation was that he wanted a country that would be able to help spread communism across the world. This country would, ideally, be both an economic and a military power. On the personal level goal, Stalin wanted power. He wanted to be the one person in control of the Soviet Union.​

For both, they eliminated whatever they considered opposition - The educated, The press, The Religious.

When an atheistic leader targets religion, then, just as EVERY death caused by a theist leader is attributed to his theism 'doing it in the name of God," then EVERY death caused by an anti-theist leader is done 'in the name of' atheism, because that's what it is.

So...

When a leader targets the Free Press, then, just as EVERY death caused by a theist leader is attributed to his theism 'doing it in the name of God," then EVERY death caused by an anti-Free Press leader is done 'in the name of' Destroy the Press.​

Is that what you are trying to sell?

So...

When a leader targets the Educated Elites, then, just as EVERY death caused by a theist leader is attributed to his theism 'doing it in the name of God," then EVERY death caused by an anti Educated Elites leader is done 'in the name of' Destroy Educated Elites.​

Is that what you are trying to sell?

On the other hand...

Some Say Hitler Was an Atheist, But His Quotes Suggest OtherwiseWhat we have to fight for is the necessary security for the existence and increase of our race and people, the subsistence of its children and the maintenance of our racial stock unmixed, the freedom and independence of the Fatherland so that our people may be enabled to fulfill the mission assigned to it by the Creator.
- Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 8

Luther and Hitler: A Linear Connection between Martin Luther and Adolf Hitler’s Anti-Semitism with a Nationalistic Foundation
Martin Luther and Adolf Hitler are inseparably linked with their extreme anti-Semitism and nationalism. It is impossible to assume that Luther did not have any influence on Hitler and his views, for it cannot be mere coincidence that Hitler’s anti-Jewish sentiment of the 1930s and 1940s mirrors that of Luther’s anti-Semitism of the 1500s. This paper will explore the connection between Luther and Hitler; it will attempt to illustrate the similarities between their German nationalism and anti-Semitism, and explain how Luther laid the foundation for Hitler’s holocaust.​

When a leader rearranges his culture to make it more to his liking...and that 'liking' includes an absence of theism and theists, then...

you figure it out.

History and facts have figured it out. You just want need to be in denial.

 

[ecco]

It sure has been fun reading through the last 4-5 pages. So many theists who can't agree on even the most basic aspects of religions.

 

[Faithofchristian]

If indeed there was a Lucifer/Satan in the first earth age, then it is clear that God committed the Original Sin by Creating Lucifer/Satan.

Well it's obvious that you haven't a clue or idea what your talking about

 

[ecco]

It was Lucifer who God change his name to Satan the devil that committed the original sin back in the first earth age.

If indeed there was a Lucifer/Satan in the first earth age, then it is clear that God committed the Original Sin by Creating Lucifer/Satan.

Well it's obvious that you haven't a clue or idea what your talking about

Well, then, how about giving me a clue instead of just posting non-responsive one liners.

Are you saying that Lucifer/Satan created himself?
Are you saying that Lucifer/Satan is stronger than God?

Or do you just run in mental circles when confronted with the nonsensical "realities" of your beliefs?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Well, then, how about giving me a clue instead of just posting non-responsive one liners.

Are you saying that Lucifer/Satan created himself?
Are you saying that Lucifer/Satan is stronger than God?

Or do you just run in mental circles when confronted with the nonsensical "realities" of your beliefs?

God created Lucifer which was a covering cherub that stood before the throne of God's.
Lucifer taken upon himself to do evil. And then God changed Lucifer name to Satan the devil.

 

[ecco]

God created Lucifer which was a covering cherub that stood before the throne of God's.
Lucifer taken upon himself to do evil. And then God changed Lucifer name to Satan the devil.

As I said...

If indeed there was a Lucifer/Satan in the first earth age, then it is clear that God committed the Original Sin by Creating Lucifer/Satan.

Did God change his name from Lucifer to Satan in order to try to cover up that they were one and the same evil entity that He created?

 

[Faithofchristian]

As I said...


Did God change his name from Lucifer to Satan in order to try to cover up that they were one and the same evil entity that He created?

Nope not at all, Lucifer was a great cherub that covered the Mercy seat at the throne of God's.
Lucifer wanted to take control and be God. Which lead to Lucifer's down fall.

And then later God changed Lucifer's name to Satan the devil.
As God didn't create Lucifer to be evil,
Lucifer taken it upon himself to be evil.

 

[dianaiad]

That makes no sense at all.
Things are done out of positive motiviations. And not "positive" in the sense of good, but "positive" in the sense of an ideology with "positive claims". In the case of Stalin, that ideology was communism.

Not all communist states were/are atheist. Italy's stab at it certainly wasn't. Benito Mussolini was very much a socialist/communist before going all fascist on us, and while he spouted atheistic
Bennito Mus. When it does include anti-theism, then that becomes part of that 'positive' statement of ideology.

Look....'theism' as a whole includes all forms of theism. Certainly atheists insist that even if one type of theism ignores/is against all other types, and even if a theistic government honors/enforces one type of theism over all others, it is still theist.

By the same token, any government that enforces anti-theism is atheist...even if it isn't a form of atheism you approve of.

Atheism is not an ideology, nore is it a collection of positive claims.

Theism is not an ideology, nor is it a collection of positive claims...but it certainly INCLUDES all theistic ideologies and their positive claims, and so does 'atheism.'

You can't throw "strong atheism' or 'anti-theism' out of the 'atheist' club just because you might not agree with either one.

Communist leaders are dictators who demand 110% loyalty of their subjects. Religion is a threat to them. Not because of their atheism, but because theists tend to put their religion before anything else.

Anti-theism is a form of atheism. You might not like it any more than I like pagan head shrinking human sacrificers...or Westboro Baptists, but they are theists and a form of theism, just as 'communist leaders' (not all communist leaders...just the antitheist ones) are atheists and their anti-theism is a form of atheism. You don't get to commit the 'no true atheist' fallacy any more than I can the 'no true Christian' (or 'no true theist') one.

When a theist is put with his back against the wall having to choose between his God and the communist dictator - chances are big that they'll choose for their God. That is something that such a dictator can not allow. That's why they oppose theism. Not because of atheism. But because of their political ideology: they want their subjects to worship them - not someone or something else.

I'm sorry, but if said leader claims that there is no God, and that his/her actions against theists are because, since there is no God, it is wrongheaded and governmentally fatal to believe in one, THAT IS ATHEISM. Not ALL atheism, but certainly a subset of it, no matter what ELSE that leader is.

You know, just like the leader who claims that there IS a God, that s/he speaks for God, and it is wrongheaded and governmentally fatal to believe in anything else....is a subset of theism. Not all theism, but a subset? Absolutely.

Sorry about that, but you cannot get around it.

That has nothing to do with atheism and everything with an ideology, in this case communism.

An ideology which includes anti-theism, which is a subset of atheism.

Atheist leaders who are NOT anti-theist are called 'secular' leaders. Secular leaders may be atheists personally, but they leave religion (pro or con) out of the government.

Remember, however, that Marx really disliked religion; communism which refers to Marxism is anti-theist as a rather important part of that ideology.

Not all communist ideologies are atheist; some are based very much in theism. The early Christians, for instance, practiced a form of communism. In the 18th and early 19th century the Mormons had the 'United Order," separate communities within the greater system which were communist in nature (the US personal income tax destroyed that idea) and there are certainly communes now which are based upon/included some religious thought.

However, the nations and leaders which were the nastiest and most murderous (Stalin, Mao and the like) were absolutely anti-theist. It was a basic aspect of their governments, and anti-theism is a subset of atheism.

Do not commit a fallacy of composition here; you know the one....that if the whole doesn't have a specific quality, then none of the parts do?

It's the backside of the 'no true Scott' fallacy.

If one subset of atheism is anti-theist, it doesn't mean that all atheist (or atheism) is anti-theist.
Just because ALL of atheism is not anti-theist, it doesn't mean that anti-theists are not atheist.

 

[dianaiad]

Read and understand your own words - "further their cause".

For Mao...
Google what were stalins objectives

The Communist Party taught the peasants that the old order of social and economic inequality was not natural, but a perversion caused by the institution of private property. To replace that "feudal" order, the party brought a vision of communal order where all would work together unselfishly for common goals.​

For Stalin...
Google: what were stalins objectives

His motivation was that he wanted a country that would be able to help spread communism across the world. This country would, ideally, be both an economic and a military power. On the personal level goal, Stalin wanted power. He wanted to be the one person in control of the Soviet Union.​

For both, they eliminated whatever they considered opposition - The educated, The press, The Religious.

So...you are saying that because they had OTHER goals...as well as getting rid of religion and the religious...that they WEREN'T out to get rid of religion and the religious.

Not logical.

So...

When a leader targets the Free Press, then, just as EVERY death caused by a theist leader is attributed to his theism 'doing it in the name of God," then EVERY death caused by an anti-Free Press leader is done 'in the name of' Destroy the Press.​

Is that what you are trying to sell?

If it is part and parcel of what he's doing? Yes.

 

[sooda]

Nope not at all, Lucifer was a great cherub that covered the Mercy seat at the throne of God's.
Lucifer wanted to take control and be God. Which lead to Lucifer's down fall.

And then later God changed Lucifer's name to Satan the devil.
As God didn't create Lucifer to be evil,
Lucifer taken it upon himself to be evil.

Are you saying Lucifer is as powerful as God?

 

[sooda]

If indeed there was a Lucifer/Satan in the first earth age, then it is clear that God committed the Original Sin by Creating Lucifer/Satan.

In Judaism "satan" is not a sentient being but a metaphor for the evil inclination – the yetzer hara – that exists in every person and tempts us to do wrong.

 

[ecco]

Nope not at all, Lucifer was a great cherub that covered the Mercy seat at the throne of God's.
Lucifer wanted to take control and be God. Which lead to Lucifer's down fall.

And then later God changed Lucifer's name to Satan the devil.
As God didn't create Lucifer to be evil,
Lucifer taken it upon himself to be evil.

Well, that's a nice story. Where did you get that information? But, nevertheless, isn't your God omnipotent? If an omnipotent God allows a cherub, great or otherwise, to become so evil that he messes with people thousands of years later, that doesn't say much for your omnipotent God.

Your omnipotent God could zap Satan/Lucifer out of existence. But He doesn't. Therefore He is the cause of Original Sin and Continuing Sin.

I doubt you would allow fire ants to keep biting your kids when they played in your backyard. If you didn't get rid of them, who should your kids blame, the fire ants or you?

 

[ecco]

So...you are saying that because they had OTHER goals...as well as getting rid of religion and the religious...that they WEREN'T out to get rid of religion and the religious.

Not logical.

Why do you put the emphasis on religion? What I said was they wanted to get rid of any and all opposition. Some dictators, like Hitler, worked with the churches and religions to further his goals.


ecco previously

So...
When a leader targets the Free Press, then, just as EVERY death caused by a theist leader is attributed to his theism 'doing it in the name of God," then EVERY death caused by an anti-Free Press leader is done 'in the name of' Destroy the Press.​

Is that what you are trying to sell?​

If it is part and parcel of what he's doing? Yes.

Nonsense.

Did dictators like Mao and Stalin try to effectively eliminate all opposition press: YES.
Did dictators like Mao and Stalin try to effectively eliminate all religious opposition: YES.

Did either Mao or Stalin ever use "In the name of atheism we must unite and build a better Country: NO.

Did either Mao or Stalin ever use "In the name of the destruction of the press we must unite and build a better Country: NO.

They just are not very good battle cries.

Did Hitler ever use "In the name of God we must eliminate Jews and build a better Country": YES.

Did Hitler ever use "In the name of God" we must fight this war: YES.

 

[ecco]

In Judaism "satan" is not a sentient being but a metaphor for the evil inclination – the yetzer hara – that exists in every person and tempts us to do wrong.

That may be. However, I was responding to Faithofchristian's concepts of God/Satan/Sin.

There are so many different versions that it is impossible to address all in a single post.

 

[dybmh]

However, one thing that all theists agree on, ( i think ), is that it is impossible to apply human morality to Omnipotent Omniscient G-d without being Omniscient ourselves.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Well, that's a nice story. Where did you get that information? But, nevertheless, isn't your God omnipotent? If an omnipotent God allows a cherub, great or otherwise, to become so evil that he messes with people thousands of years later, that doesn't say much for your omnipotent God.

Your omnipotent God could zap Satan/Lucifer out of existence. But He doesn't. Therefore He is the cause of Original Sin and Continuing Sin.

I doubt you would allow fire ants to keep biting your kids when they played in your backyard. If you didn't get rid of them, who should your kids blame, the fire ants or you?

Nope not at all,
that's man's teachings that say God is
omnipotent in all knowing.
There is no where in the Bible that supports God as being all knowing

Man's teachings will say God is all knowing. But I would like for anyone produce where it's written at, That God is all knowing.

 

[dybmh]

Nope not at all,
that's man's teachings that say God is
omnipotent in all knowing.
There is no where in the Bible that supports God as being all knowing

Man's teachings will say God is all knowing. But I would like for anyone produce where it's written at, That God is all knowing.

God is the knowledge the knower and the known. It's Rambam... Judaism. Do you want me to find it?

 

[dybmh]

It's actually a simple idea. Knowledge is a creation just like anything else. God is the creator of ALL; ALL includes knowledge. Therefore God is all-knowing.