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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
God has committed mass genocide several times, yet Satan only requires one hand and two fingers to count the people he has killed, and those people God gave him the OK to kill.
Satan is us making forms, the children constructing play things, the emotionally childish manner of mortal demise. By analogy, it is civilization, music, possiveness, greed, friendship, romance, grief, and wonderment at the world so quickly created and so swifly ripped away (apparently by circumstance). These and others are social forms by which we, as humans, have structured our world. In a slightly broader sense, it is also our conscious existence that creates the forms of the world-as-we-know-it that envelopes us every waking moment. With our knowledge of the world around us our as building blocks, we each structure the world in a unqiue way, no two people seeing the world quite the same way from moment to moment. In the broader analogy, Satan represents the murder of the uniform void by fracturing it into knowable "things", and vice-versa the uniform void is the destruction of Satan (at the end of the clip) and all knowable things.
So is the destruction of the physical body by anyone else constitute as murder still?
So God is the balance and/or the original creator and somehow infallible then? IMO that seems like taking the stance of "it's my child I'll beat it all I want", and Satan seems to represent humanity here, knowledge and emotion, which I have trouble seeing as bad.
If you're asking if that's something that follows from the interpretation of the Mark Twain clip that I gave, I don't know. On the other hand, I do think that something that is the source of both fallibility and infallibility cannot be held up as fallible or infallible unless it is held up as both.
I don't follow, but I will say that yes, Satan as portrayed here could represent humanity at its best (creating) and worst (destroying), and of course everything in between. Satanist types hold Satan as humanity, as knowledge and emotion, to be exhalted.
I was looking for more of a character study of the two, I meant that even though God is the creator, it doesn't make it acceptable for him to destroy on whim what he creates. I like your interpretation of the sketch, but I think the Novella The Mysterious Stranger based on the The Chronicle of Young Satan and No.44 by Mark Twain was more of a social commentary on organized religion since Satan in the Novella is the Nephew of Satan (carrying on the family name). You can read it here if you want.
No, the mysterious stranger is the nephew of Satan, also named Satan. The claymation sketch of The Mysterious Stranger is based on three incomplete works written by Mark Twain called No.44 The Mysterious Stranger, Schoolhouse Hill, and The Chronicle of Young Satan.
Alright, but we're talking about the destruction of the physical form, in the sketch Satan along with the children create plants, a castle, and people, and that somehow Satan destroying what he co-created when he saw the pettiness of humanity acted out through the clay people, was somehow evil. Now in the OT, God doesn't have help from kids creating people, but he does destroy what he creates frequently, but few seem to see this as bad.
Care to explain how God flooding the world or the destruction of Sodom was somehow Satan's fault?
