Debate: Satanism vs Christianity
Side: Satanism

Ok i promised id be back the next day and here i am. I just dont trust that damn ipod ever since it randomly shit out and dumped a whole argument i made. But i digress...To understand the argument, one must understand the fundamentals differences of Christian views. Those who have the ability to think more abstractly understand that, while the Bible has stories seem unsavory or impossible, Christians accept the images as fact while understanding there is an overall lesson.Though there's a limit. I dont understand how christians can overlook such seriously messed up things. And if someone does posess the ability to think "abstractly" then surely the existence and morality of their god would come into question. Also, unfortunaltely, many many people do not think abstractly nor are they able to take away the overall lesson. Many people take it as a literal story, and have to be told what the lesson is. And it also depends on what the lesson is. If the lesson makes up for the story then it's fine. For instance if the story of job ended up with a moral lesson like: tolerate the beliefs of others and respect all races and people (hypothetically of course i know this lesson has nothing to do with the story) then that beautiful moral lesson would completely make up for such a barbaric story. Yet' what is the lesson? Remain faithfull to god no matter what (even if he allows you to be tormented) and you will be rewarded. That isnt moral at all. That doesnt apply to society and other people, it only applies to christians and their god. Who does that help? Nobody. And STILL theres that "reward". Always for a "reward". You mentioned Job and he was a great example of this. Job's story was elaborate and extreme to show that a Christian's faith in God will yield God's blessings in the end.My idea of a "blessing" isnt a replacement family. If the reader was able to think abstractly, the first things they would be questioning is the god and his morality and hipocricy before they even reached the end of the story. Admittedly, many Christians do not have the capacity think abstractly and simply glean a lesson from these stories. From my experience, these are usually sweet people with simple minds who need the ability to absorb a lesson, but cannot understand imagery. I thought they were: "one of the most well educated and wealthy followers"? You completely contradicted yourself. Except this time youre right.As a result, your comment about disregard for human lives and emotions is mute and immaterial at best.In reduards to the final lesson of the story yes, if you look at the story as not being important and the true importance is in the final lesson. However, many people take the final lesson to heart AND that the story literally happened. Which, if so, completely flies in the face of this "god is all love" theory. Im using this to expose the hipocricy, absurdity, and immorality of god. Because which is true? The stories that make you feel good? Or the twisted ones? You cant pick and choose.It is equal to complaining about the treachery of the tortoise when he tricked the hare or to complain a tortoise cannot talk.For the record, the tortoise didnt trick the hare. He just kept walking. And how is that treachery even if he did? It would be simple trickery or mischeif at most and the hare wouldve deserved it. In the bible stories there is horrible, horrible things that children shouldnt even be exposed to. You hear people today questioning violent video games and television shows. Yet, these stories expose them to grade A horror.And when you tell the story, nobody from the beginning actually believes the tortoise and hare ever existed nor that the race happened. So the only thing to gain from it is the overall lesson which is beneficial.With most bible stories, again, people actually believe in this god and these characters. Yet they never question the things that happen and ignore the immorality in the very story itself. If you believe in these characters and god and the legitimacy (is that a word?) of the story than you must analyze all of the story as well as the overall lesson. Know what i mean? I apologize if this is not very clear. Its early and im finding it hard to put my thoughts into text. Should let our kids learn that "slow and steady wins the race" or should we cry foul?The lesson is the only thing to take from it because everything else can be ignored, because nobody believes the characters and story are real. So the only thing to look for in it is the overall meaning. If someone does actually believe the story and the character than the story must be analyzed a little further. For example, theres no reason to analyze or question the tortoise and the hare because its known to be unreal from the start. Nobody's gonna ask "why can they talk?" or "why are they racing?" its a fairytale. Yet when the story is believed to be true. and the characters are believed to be real. Then questions SHOULD be asked. The things like that should be payed attention too if they bring question to the overall validity of the story and characters.Like if in a scientific report you read it over and the conclusion is, Magnesium is the most durable metal. But you notice only one trial was conducted and theres no list of errors. Because of this you should be saying "hey somethings not right here". You should call them on that and ask for an explaination before accepting that conclusion whether it's right or wrong. I hope that clearified.Understandably, thousands of years later we notice scientific flaws or criticize the text, but I think most agree the authors were well beyond their time.Oh without a doubt. These were intellegent people for that age. Though the key words are "that age". Which is the bronze age. It's the 21st century. Nobody should be getting their science and history from a 2000 year old tome, let alone their morality. Anything we knew then, we know now and even more so has it been perfected. We dont NEED that book anymore. It was highly influential in history because those teachings were as you said far beyond their time. People needed that book to live by. But today, all of that stuff in the bible is basic modern day morality that everyone has just by living in this time. As we grow up we know that you should be kind to others and respect our neighbors and not commit adultery. If we grow up in modern society we will gain this stuff without even knowing it. Its not like we're savages until we pick it up. The morality in Satanism is a little more specific. Ill explain. When going into the religion, it is assumed that the person already has basic modern morality. So the teachings dont bother with what we already know. It doesnt reteach common knowledge. What it does is set guidelines that might not be so obvious. For example: Dont give your opinions unless asked for them. This one simple rule is often overlooked, and is one more little thing you can do to be respectfull. Theres also the preaching of the gain of knowledge which is absent in the bible. And so on. It is an addition to what we already know instead of a review of it. It is more suited to a modern world than christianity which really has nothing to provide. Many Christians just are not capable of understanding the abstract view of God and must see Him as a grand puppeteer.Again, contradicting yourself. Just saying. It is important to note that Christians who are capable of thinking in more sophisticated terms understand God and more of an entity or a positive energy with intelligence. Simply put, Christian doctrine explains God as the embodiment of good. That is pretty much it!This flies in the face of the bulk of biblical teachings which say that god is an actual entity that is the creator, judge, good, and also evil. Because if this god can create hell and satan than there must be an evil side.It is important to mention this, because your rebuttal complains that Christianity is centered around worshiping God. In that lens, if the Bible is moral imagery and the Christians believe that God is good, then it is Christianity must be inherently good.Not neccesarily. We've reviewed that the bible is not necessarily moral imagery in many cases, at least to the bulk of the human population that is outside of christianity. What christians believe does not matter. What matters is what's actually true. Therfore christianity is not necessarily "good". It can do good. And it can sometimes preach good. Yet it is not entirely good. Its bloody history and twisted stories and backwards morals show this. Something that is inherently good is something that does the least harm. Satanism has never killed anyone (at least real satanism. Im sure psychos will do anything), never had a war, and doesnt teach anything harmfull. I must reiterate, the focus is on the premise of God's good will, not on the technical details the authors seemed to have missed a few thousand years ago.Yet like you said, many people are not able to realize this which is a serious problem. So, from the Christian viewpoint, subservience to God is about believing in a greater good larger than yourself. It is serving the world, the universe, mankind, everything and everyone.Keywords: "From a christian viewpoint". From an outside perspective looking in we see that subservience to god is about reward and often fear among other things. Its about serving God through good acts, not necessarily because they were the right thing to do. Serving the world, universe, and mankind? I dont know where youre getting that from. Everything in the bible circles back to god in some way. If it was about serving mankind than surely there wouldnt be parts about condoning slavery, and killing certain groups of people. Then again, the only people the bible considers worthy of being part of "mankind" are straight god fearing christians. Surely there would also be things that say "Not only for god, but because it is the right thing to do". Or something to that effect. I dunno. Thats just me.You must understand also the being Christians call "Satan" is basically the Kleenex of the religion. Other words used are "evil", "the enemy" or "the devil." The Bible talks about darkness, a serpent, and a fallen angel. Christian doctrine does not even describe anyone in particular. Job's story uses satan as an enemy of God, but one character in one story. The character could have been named "Bob." This is not the same satan that is referred to in other Christian rhetoric. Instead, this is a collective term. In another post you mentioned that Christians do not understand Satanism. That is because your Satan and our idea of an enemy, sometimes called "Satan" are not the same entity.Precisely. This is why it is agrevating having discussing the two. Because christians do not understand this, which again, shows a lack of knowledge, again disputing you. And clearly you are intellegent enough to observe this that, yes, Satan is just the name given to "evil". Which is also part of god because Satan was made by him. Its almost like that episode of The Fairly Odd Parents where Timmy wishes he had no emotions. So all of his emotions split into their own forms and into a box. Satan is like the evil part of god in a "human" form. Average christians cant make this observation and focus too much on Satan being a real thing and evil and he'll trick you and take your soul and blah blah blah. I blame the mainstream of christianity which focuses too much on this. Its gotten too literal. I was particularly puzzled in your rebuttal when you mentioned "I don't know where your getting your ideas that satanism is usually a selfish and antisocial thing." and you calling this a "hasty generalization". Meanwhile, you posted in this same debate that Satanism "preaches putting yourself and your priorities above others". Your post describing Satanism defines selfish and antisocial behavior.I wasnt as articulate and specific as i should have been and i apologize. I did explain better in part one to this rebuttal that i did last night. It is not really selfish. It's smart. What is being selfish? The word implies that it is being self serving maliciously. For instance, not respecting others and eating a whole pie before anyone else can have any. Or not dropping a few dollars in the boot for the firehouse. This is selfish.Satanism teaches to put your needs above those of others. NEED is the key word. Not want. What do we NEED? Food, water, shelter, money, job's, ect. These are necessary to modern life and survival in general. So, it doesnt make sense to donate to charity when you yourself are struggling to stay afloat. Or taking time off from work to assist in hurricane relief when you need the money for work. It is not being selfish to put needs above others. I do applaud you for your efforts and community service. (Incidentally, Christians are told to do good acts in secret. This helps keep a Christians' focus on his mission for good and not self promotion.)Dont get me wrong, i dont go around and gloat and boast about what i do. That wasnt my intention. I was meerly using those things to show that you made a hasty generalization of satanists being antisocial and selfish. I dont fit this and neither do most satanists. And surely they dont brag about it either. Christianity teaches that we must focus on the greater good and have Faith we will be provided for. This is a COMPLETELY selfless doctrine and, believe me when I say, it is beautiful to see people who have totally dedicated themselves to the greater good.Selfless yet for a purpose that is not purely for the sake of being selfless. Theres always that subservience and reward piece. Nagging as it may be. It isnt completely selfless.You hoped I was joking that Christianity is a minority. I was not. The fact is that Christians only account for 33% of religious believers. It may be one of the top 5 religions and it may dwarf Satanism in membership, but 33% is still not a majority. It is just a math thing, not a joke.Yes but what are the religions in question here? Christianity and satanism. So, we should only be comparing these two as we have been. And compared to satanism christianity is MASSIVE. Therfore it isnt right to judge satanism based on the good it can do because christianity has a clear advantage economically and population wise. I can understand why a Satanist must enjoy this debate. A self serving religion is certainly threatened by putting other first or social welfare. I have read tenants of many other religions, including Satanism. I can see great qualities in all of them and some matters with which I do not agree. I can also understand how some people may question Christianity. However, if the debate is about adding up Christianity and Satanism in a head to head comparison, then the choice is clearly pro-Christianity. Just as some people still actually spend money on Blackberry phones, one cannot argue with a preference.I completely disagree and have stated why. LOL blackberry phones such. Stupid little buttons. What im saying is Christianity is no I-phone. It too has many, many flaws. Its like a nokia... so many flaws, but it appears to be indestructible...