• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Johnathon Sharkey on Satanism and Christianity

robtex

Veteran Member
John Sharkey is a Satanist who is running for governor of Minnesota in 2006. He was on a news show which I couldn't identify from the mpeg and he said something quite interesting that I wanted to share with you. When asked why he was a satanist he qouted Matthew 27:46 " My God why have you forsaken me?" Sharkey stated the he could not follow a God who condems his own child to death. He than went on (much to the utter annoyance of the newsman whom I suspect was a Christian), on various things that God did to kill and punish people in the world according to the bible. This brings up two interesting questions though,

1) Is God having his son tortured and executed (assuming you believed this event happened) a reasonable reason to reject a God on, and

2) In the Bible we know God killed lots of people yet in the Bible who did Satan kill? You have one God slaughtering humanity by the thousands throughout the Bible and even promsing, according to Revelations to come back to do it again and another God or something supernatural who doesn't seem to kill anyone that I can recall. Isn't the God that kills humanity the "bad guy?" Putting the death toll of the two super entities side-by-side Satan comes out smelling like a rose death count wise doesn't he?

Footnote:

J. Sharkey's governor's site:
http://www.jonathonforgovernor.us/Home_page.html (the site is worth visiting many topics may come out of the content of his political page).
 

ChrisP

Veteran Member
Is Sharkey the one that was arrested for some prior offence out of state recently?

Either way I agree he has a good point. Biblically has Satan tempted people, but so did God when he asked Abram to kill his son (and Abram would have done it too). I think the question is... if Satan tempts people into losing their souls into the Abyss for eternity is that worse than ending a physical life?

So death-count wise yes, but I can see most of the Christians arguing that this topic is not about Physical death but a spritual one.

Nice post Rob.

Can't say I believe in God and Satan as the bible presents them, but Mr Sharkey has a point.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
robtex said:
John Sharkey is a Satanist who is running for governor of Minnesota in 2006. He was on a news show which I couldn't identify from the mpeg and he said something quite interesting that I wanted to share with you. When asked why he was a satanist he qouted Matthew 27:46 " My God why have you forsaken me?" Sharkey stated the he could not follow a God who condems his own child to death. He than went on (much to the utter annoyance of the newsman whom I suspect was a Christian), on various things that God did to kill and punish people in the world according to the bible. This brings up two interesting questions though,

1) Is God having his son tortured and executed (assuming you believed this event happened) a reasonable reason to reject a God on, and

2) In the Bible we know God killed lots of people yet in the Bible who did Satan kill? You have one God slaughtering humanity by the thousands throughout the Bible and even promsing, according to Revelations to come back to do it again and another God or something supernatural who doesn't seem to kill anyone that I can recall. Isn't the God that kills humanity the "bad guy?" Putting the death toll of the two super entities side-by-side Satan comes out smelling like a rose death count wise doesn't he?

Footnote:

J. Sharkey's governor's site:
http://www.jonathonforgovernor.us/Home_page.html (the site is worth visiting many topics may come out of the content of his political page).

I had some email coorespondence with John a few months ago. He seems like a nice enough guy, but I wouldn't want him for governor.

1) No.

2) Literal interpretation for Revelation is not a wise interpretative move.

AE
 

robtex

Veteran Member
ChrisP said:
Is Sharkey the one that was arrested for some prior offence out of state recently?

Either way I agree he has a good point. Biblically has Satan tempted people, but so did God when he asked Abram to kill his son (and Abram would have done it too). I think the question is... if Satan tempts people into losing their souls into the Abyss for eternity is that worse than ending a physical life?

So death-count wise yes, but I can see most of the Christians arguing that this topic is not about Physical death but a spritual one.

Nice post Rob.

Can't say I believe in God and Satan as the bible presents them, but Mr Sharkey has a point.

I don't know if he got arrested be interesting to look into that. About the Satan eternal death thing....say you have this book, and you believe everything in it really happened or was at least inspired to represent the morality of the big players in that book. You know God's team wrote the book (as opposed to team Satan), and they say everyone goes to hell by choosing Satan. However, Satan never says that, and in addition the God that does say that, is killing people left and right. Wouldn't it be fair to be skeptical of the eternal damnation theory if the one God says the other super-entity is doing such (though the other never acknowledes such) between mass slaughterings of the people this God is promising to protect?

What I mean is if you accept the bible as truth, and you observe one God killing humans on a whim throughout, and the other not, why would it be reasonable to think the non-killing God is or super-entitiy is torturing them in the afterlife after witness the first God torturing and killing them on earth?

About the temptation thing, I am assuming you are talking about Genesis. Two things about that. (1) It was a serpent who is believed to have been Satan but not confirmed by the writer or many of the Christian historians. It is a proposition at best. (2) Even if that serpent was Satan, the only thing he tempted them with was the gaining of knowledge by eating the forbidden fruit. That could be a thread upon itself but tempting someone to better themselves through knowledge seems like a positive as opposed to negative thing.
 

robtex

Veteran Member
angellous_evangellous said:
I had some email coorespondence with John a few months ago. He seems like a nice enough guy, but I wouldn't want him for governor.

1) No.

2) Literal interpretation for Revelation is not a wise interpretative move.

AE

Nate, that is neat that you emailed him. I bet that was an interesting conversation. I wouldn't vote for him either. I disagree with almost his entire platform but that is another thread.

On your answer to # 1 could you expound upon that.

On you answer to # 2 even if you didn't interpret it literally but rather as the inspired word of God doesn't the message still come across as God can and will kill you if you disobey him or tick him off? And even in an inspired text, what did Satan do that was so bad? Inspirationally speaking I get out of the Bible, "don't tick God off or he will mess you up" and Satan seems like a passive fella. He doesn't do much in the good book.
 

robtex

Veteran Member
Chris thanks for pointing-out my typo to me on the thread title!! That was funny lol.
 

ChrisP

Veteran Member
robtex said:
I don't know if he got arrested be interesting to look into that. About the Satan eternal death thing....say you have this book, and you believe everything in it really happened or was at least inspired to represent the morality of the big players in that book. You know God's team wrote the book (as opposed to team Satan), and they say everyone goes to hell by choosing Satan. However, Satan never says that, and in addition the God that does say that, is killing people left and right. Wouldn't it be fair to be skeptical of the eternal damnation theory if the one God says the other super-entity is doing such (though the other never acknowledes such) between mass slaughterings of the people this God is promising to protect?
been down that train of thought many times (and I'd put money on most gnostic-types having done the same). Living in this age of propaganda it's hard to believe what you're told without using a pinch of salt.

What I mean is if you accept the bible as truth, and you observe one God killing humans on a whim throughout, and the other not, why would it be reasonable to think the non-killing God is or super-entitiy is torturing them in the afterlife after witness the first God torturing and killing them on earth?
I agree, it's a question of Authority. Do you believe there is an Authority? It's an interesting question and one that seperates many groups of theists into different religious groups. Also it is the division between Non-theists and Theists in some cases.

About the temptation thing, I am assuming you are talking about Genesis. Two things about that. (1) It was a serpent who is believed to have been Satan but not confirmed by the writer or many of the Christian historians. It is a proposition at best. (2) Even if that serpent was Satan, the only thing he tempted them with was the gaining of knowledge by eating the forbidden fruit. That could be a thread upon itself but tempting someone to better themselves through knowledge seems like a positive as opposed to negative thing.
Exactly, and even if it was a serpent, serpents are "god's" creatures too. They perform necessary functions in this flow of things we live in.

Now is knowledge a bad thing? from my stand point Yes, in the biblical sense of knowledge of right and wrong. This again is probably a thread by itself but if you'd like to discuss it here I'm quite open to that.

robtex said:
Chris thanks for pointing-out my typo to me on the thread title!! That was funny lol.
:slap: ya shoulda just fixed it, then there would have only be two of us the know! Ooops there's that knowledge word again :)
 

Buttercup

Veteran Member
1) Is God having his son tortured and executed (assuming you believed this event happened) a reasonable reason to reject a God on

Good grief. Anyone who has spent a few mintues reading the New Testament realizes that God sending Jesus to die was the ultimate sacrifice OF HIMSELF for the love of humanity. Jesus was a man yet fully God as well. As hard to believe as that is.....that is the cornerstone Christianity rests on. God sent HIMSELF to die.

I and my Father are one. John 10:30

For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. 1 John 5:7

I'm sorry but the other questions are too broad and I will have to think of more detailed answers for those after sleeping a bit! :)
 

Revasser

Terrible Dancer
robtex said:
I
(2) Even if that serpent was Satan, the only thing he tempted them with was the gaining of knowledge by eating the forbidden fruit. That could be a thread upon itself but tempting someone to better themselves through knowledge seems like a positive as opposed to negative thing.

I think most Satanists would certainly agree with this, especially those of the theistic variety. Yahweh was trying to keep humanity blind and servile, while Satan, nice fellow that he is, sought to help them gain knowledge and free them from the chains of ignorance and servitude.
 

ChrisP

Veteran Member
Revasser said:
I think most Satanists would certainly agree with this, especially those of the theistic variety. Yahweh was trying to keep humanity blind and servile, while Satan, nice fellow that he is, sought to help them gain knowledge and free them from the chains of ignorance and servitude.
Gnostic Christians such as Halcyon and Buttons would also agree. Yahweh is the Demiurge.
 

Karl R

Active Member
robtex said:
1) Is God having his son tortured and executed (assuming you believed this event happened) a reasonable reason to reject a God on,
I suppose it depends on how you view this event. I'd use the analogy of a general asking for a volunteer for a suicide mission. Jesus apparently knew what he was signing up for, and seems to have had the opportunity to back out less than a day before his death (in the Garden of Gethsemane).

robtex said:
2) In the Bible we know God killed lots of people yet in the Bible who did Satan kill?
The first part of your question depends a lot on how deterministic your view of existence is. If you believe in absolute determinism, then god has killed every person that's ever died.

In the old testament times, people's view of the universe was a lot more deterministic than my personal view is. They claimed god was responsible for many occurences that I would refer to as natural events. (This deterministic view can still be seen in many christians, like the ones who claimed Katrina was punishment for New Orleans' sinfulness.)

I know my perspective is different from theirs, so I don't take those events literally, even when the text of the bible specifically says god killed someone.

I view Satan as being an anthropomorphization of our own temptation to do evil. I believe some people find it easier to confront and overcome their internal weakness if they externalize it.

ChrisP said:
Can't say I believe in God and Satan as the bible presents them, but Mr Sharkey has a point.
Based on the satanist literature I've read, I doubt that Mr Sharkey believes in god or satan as the bible presents them.

The main reason I dislike satanism is that one of its main instructions is that people should live their lives in a completely self-centered fashion. People who live their lives that way aren't pleasant to be around (regardless of their religious affiliation), so I don't like a religious/philosophical system that encourages that behavior.
 

robtex

Veteran Member
Karl, in repsonse to your post:

What do you think of a general who has his son as a major and asks him to go on a suicide mission. Even worse, in God case, who is all-powerful and correct the situation without having his son go on a sucide mission decides to send him anyway? And what of Judas? The apostle who was a key componet to the death of Jesus, as per the God/Jesus plan was later murdered by God for betrayal. So God has the power to fix all problems as he is all powerful but the best plan he can come-up with is to sacrifce his son. Than he needs an apostle to help with the plan but than turns on him and kills him too in Acts 1:18. To qoute the NIV from Biblegateway.com

" With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out."

On the determinalistic part of your post I am gathing that you find the Bible to be the inspired word of God as opposed to the literal word of God. Understand that even if the events didn't happen but the Bible is inspired by God and God kills people left and right throughout the book (while Satan refrains from such activity) I could see that as an inspiration and justification (hey president Bush certainly does) to kill others. If the book is a personfication of two super characters and one kills and the other does not, if the followers follow the killing God it is easier to rationalize and justify the killing of man.
 

Karl R

Active Member
robtex said:
What do you think of a general who has his son as a major and asks him to go on a suicide mission.
I think it really sucks to be the guy in charge, especially if you have two roles which conflict with each other.

robtex said:
Even worse, in God case, who is all-powerful and correct the situation without having his son go on a sucide mission decides to send him anyway?
Where in the bible does it say that god could fix the situation in some other way? Do you have some insight into how the situation could be fixed in a manner that would not remove our free will?

You're making assumptions about this situation that fall outside your beliefs, my beliefs, and the beliefs of mainstream christianity. That makes it a fairly weak arguement to use in a debate.

robtex said:
And what of Judas? The apostle who was a key componet to the death of Jesus, as per the God/Jesus plan was later murdered by God for betrayal. "With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out."
Is this murder, or an accidental death of someone who had the misfortune to trip?

The scripture doesn't say that god killed him. You're taking an extremely deterministic view of events.

Take that same bible and read Matthew 27:1-10. In that passage, it says Judas hanged himself. In this account, Judas excercised his free will in killing himself.

Granted, the two accounts do contradict each other. In that case, I'm not going to sieze one of them as being The Truth and ignore the other passage. I consider both of them to be unconfirmed accounts of Judas' death.

robtex said:
On the determinalistic part of your post I am gathing that you find the Bible to be the inspired word of God as opposed to the literal word of God. Understand that even if the events didn't happen but the Bible is inspired by God and God kills people left and right throughout the book (while Satan refrains from such activity) I could see that as an inspiration and justification (hey president Bush certainly does) to kill others.
If they're willing to ignore the ten commandments, the great commandment, and several other places where it indicates that murder is wrong.

You can choose to interpret the bible to justify all sorts of wrong-doing. Is that a flaw with the core teachings, or a flaw in the intentions of the people using obscure verses to justify this behavior?

robtex said:
If the book is a personfication of two super characters and one kills and the other does not, if the followers follow the killing God it is easier to rationalize and justify the killing of man.
If they choose to ignore the laws against murder...
If they presume that they have the right to end someone's life just like god does...
If they think that "loving others as you love yourself" allows murder as a loving action...

Yeah, then I can see how it would be easy for someone to make that mistake.


Just as a clarification, I consider many of the stories in the bible to be allegorical. The events aren't necessarily true. The lesson in the story might not be easy to discern at a quick glance. That's why I use ethical guidelines like the great commandment as the general rule I follow in my behavior, especially if my interpretation of a passage seems to contradict that commandment.
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
ChrisP said:
Gnostic Christians such as Halcyon and Buttons would also agree. Yahweh is the Demiurge.
Thanks Chris :highfive:

Yeah, all these ideas and questions you're putting forth Rob are really old, and were answered centuries ago too, by the Gnostics.

Q. Why did God kill millions of people?
A. That wasn't God, that was an arrogant, ignorant, retarded (doesn't sound PC, i hate using that word, but it is accurate) child.

Q. Why is Jesus's God a God of love when he killed so many in the OT?
A. Jesus's God is not the God of the OT.

Q. Is the serpent evil, is he Satan?
A. Nope, the serpent is good and revered by the Ophites, as Eve is revered by all Gnostics as the bringer of Gnosis to humanity.

Q. Is Satan evil?
A. Nope, not as evil as the Demiuge anyway. He's an Archon of the Demiurge, his role is to make Yahweh look good - thus placating His ego.

Of course, none of this is to be taken literally. ;)
 

Buttons*

Glass half Panda'd
Here's my post, which has absolutely nothing to do with the OP... (sorry, delete it if you like)
Halcyon said:
Thanks Chris :highfive:
yeah! thanks! *smiles*

Yeah, all these ideas and questions you're putting forth Rob are really old, and were answered centuries ago too, by the Gnostics.

Q. Why did God kill millions of people?
A. That wasn't God, that was an arrogant, ignorant, retarded (doesn't sound PC, i hate using that word, but it is accurate) child.
haha....retard.... um, yes. Basically the Demiurge was much like frankenstien's monster (maybe not... but this is how i see it... so back off!) in that with his creation he was mis-shapen, grotesque, and ignorant, and was cast aside from his (now this is just an allegory people) creator. (gods are personifications of thought... nothing more really.) "Death" is being asleep and ignorant of gnosis/ the one/ love.... blah, blah, blah...

Q. Why is Jesus's God a God of love when he killed so many in the OT?
A. Jesus's God is not the God of the OT.
Yeshua is a manifistation of Seth in some beliefs... (Seth, from the mythology side is the perfect son of Adamas, the perfect human that lives with the one... although, its only an allegory... the genesis story is simply metaphorical as well...)

Q. Is the serpent evil, is he Satan?
A. Nope, the serpent is good and revered by the Ophites, as Eve is revered by all Gnostics as the bringer of Gnosis to humanity.
SOME believed the serpant to be Yeshua in another form.... this again is JUST mythology...

Q. Is Satan evil?
A. Nope, not as evil as the Demiuge anyway. He's an Archon of the Demiurge, his role is to make Yahweh look good - thus placating His ego.

Of course, none of this is to be taken literally. ;)
..... YEP!
 

robtex

Veteran Member
Karl R said:
I think it really sucks to be the guy in charge, especially if you have two roles which conflict with each other.

Except in this example the all-powerful God has the choice on how the senerio can and should play out. He CHOSE to have his son tortured and murdered as a solution.


Karl R said:
Where in the bible does it say that god could fix the situation in some other way? Do you have some insight into how the situation could be fixed in a manner that would not remove our free will?
Actually an interesting note. There is no alternate solution proposed however, God in the Bible is presented as an all-powerful deity who orchestrated the universe, a universe where one day man would move to achieve knowledge and independance and in exchange where God would execute his only son as a reformation and than transfer the guilt from this to man for all eternity.

Karl R said:
You're making assumptions about this situation that fall outside your beliefs, my beliefs, and the beliefs of mainstream christianity. That makes it a fairly weak arguement to use in a debate.
What assumption did I make?


Karl R said:
Is this murder, or an accidental death of someone who had the misfortune to trip?

It is murder. Falling on your side in a field doesn't make one "burst open" that has divine intervention written all over it.


Karl R said:
Take that same bible and read Matthew 27:1-10. In that passage, it says Judas hanged himself. In this account, Judas excercised his free will in killing himself.

Granted, the two accounts do contradict each other. In that case, I'm not going to sieze one of them as being The Truth and ignore the other passage. I consider both of them to be unconfirmed accounts of Judas' death.

Either way the moral of the story is Judus was used by God and than either killed by God or killed himself for the guilt God placed upon for the deed that God willed. The same guilt the God of the bible has given to all its followers since. I didn't know about the hanging passage but interesting the obvious contradiction sits in plain view yet so many people accept the story of Jesus's death without any questions.

Rest of post answer in next post:
 

robtex

Veteran Member
Karl R said:
If they're willing to ignore the ten commandments, the great commandment, and several other places where it indicates that murder is wrong.

Your God ignores that commandment. He kills throughout the Bible and than promises to come back and kill some more in Revelations. What if his followers thought of it as "Do as I do not as I say?"

Karl R said:
You can choose to interpret the bible to justify all sorts of wrong-doing. Is that a flaw with the core teachings, or a flaw in the intentions of the people using obscure verses to justify this behavior?

While I like your intrepretation of the scriptures, understand you are being as selective in your intrepretation of it as the Christians whom condone murder, prejudice and hatred within the confines of the same book. You both pick what you think is the central theme of the book ignoring contradicting notions and use that as a philosophy on how to live your life.

For instance you say Jesus = peace and love yet when I read Matthew 10:34-36 I read a Jesus who says (from biblegateway.com) qoute,
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn
" 'a man against his father,
a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw—
36a man's enemies will be the members of his own household"

Every Christian is guily of selective intrepretation. It is impossible not to given the extreme numbers of contradictons in the Bible. As a great cheatsheet to these contradictions a great site is
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/

rest on next post:
 

robtex

Veteran Member
Karl R said:
If they choose to ignore the laws against murder...
If they presume that they have the right to end someone's life just like god does...
If they think that "loving others as you love yourself" allows murder as a loving action...

Yeah, then I can see how it would be easy for someone to make that mistake.

Laws? You mean law as in the one in the ten commandments. The same law God breaks systematically throughout the Bible and the same law he really breaks when executing his own son. Which was the point Starkey was making in that interview. Interesting that you say God has the right to end life but man does not. If God commands man to kill (which many through history today and yesterday contends that he does) is this the only time killing is premissable? Also people kill those they love all the time. Reasons vary but more people will be killed statistically by people that love or care about them than by strangers. Not that that has anything to do with religion but love is not a barrior to killing. It is a red herring to the issue at best. Besides, again God loved his son and had him tortured and killed. See the common theme that naturally comes out of Jesus's death?


Karl R said:
Just as a clarification, I consider many of the stories in the bible to be allegorical. The events aren't necessarily true. The lesson in the story might not be easy to discern at a quick glance. That's why I use ethical guidelines like the great commandment as the general rule I follow in my behavior, especially if my interpretation of a passage seems to contradict that commandment.

That is a better way to look at it as opposed to seeing it as actual events or "the inerrant word of God" however, I have to ask, in accordance to J Sharkey's proposition what morality to you pull out of the torture and execution of Jesus and the killing, prejudice, crimes and genocide throughout the Bible? No matter how good your skills as a spindoctor (or any holy man's for that matter) I don't see positive values coming out of allegorical stories advocating mass death destruction slavery, rape torture and genocide. You can selectivly pick the nice pretty happy passages and ignore the ugly ones, which most Christians seem to do, but you I can't imagine how you can spin slavery, torture, rape, death and genocide or anyother social injustice like it as a postitive analogy in your religion or any philosophy.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
robtex said:
Nate, that is neat that you emailed him. I bet that was an interesting conversation. I wouldn't vote for him either. I disagree with almost his entire platform but that is another thread.

On your answer to # 1 could you expound upon that.

On you answer to # 2 even if you didn't interpret it literally but rather as the inspired word of God doesn't the message still come across as God can and will kill you if you disobey him or tick him off? And even in an inspired text, what did Satan do that was so bad? Inspirationally speaking I get out of the Bible, "don't tick God off or he will mess you up" and Satan seems like a passive fella. He doesn't do much in the good book.

1) Sure. If we are going to believe that God exists and sent his son to be tortured and executed, there is no reasonable reason to reject the rest of the story: that Jesus died on the behalf of all humanity. It makes to sense to accept one portion of the story, particularly the role of God, and not accept the rest of it. This guy is saying that God exists, sent his son, Jesus died for us, so we should reject God. That doesn't sound reasonable to me at all. :confused:

2) Satan is very active in the NT - much more so in the OT. I don't have time for references today, but I can list a few actions off the top of my head:

a. Satan is behind all deceptions of humanity, particularly the rejection of Jesus
b. Demonic spirits are behind idols
c. Satan attempts to keep Jesus from being the Messiah
d. Satan is the father of all lies and murder.
e. Satan is partially responsible for the current sinful condition of humanity (connection between Paul, Jesus, and John's Revelation)
f. Demon possession in the NT
g.Satan is behind the Herodian attack on newborns in Judea (connection to Revelation - the dragon who tries to kill the woman's son at birth)

There have been many attempts to show the similarities between God and Satan, particularly with God ordering the killing of people in Caanan in the OT and the Apocalypse in the NT. A striking difference in the text at least is that Satan wants to kill everyone (murder), and God's killing is the execution of justice. If God is a just God, then we should be afraid of Him, because none of us are just as God is just. So yes, I would not want to make the Creator of the Cosmos upset, even if the Apocalypse isn't to be taken literally.
 
Top