Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Exploring the details of Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #1

Post by William »

'The Devil's cleverest wile is to make men believe that he does not exist. '—Charles Baudelaire.


[Assuming Actual Evil is a real thing;]

QFD: Is there a good case for thinking Satan is a real entity?
We have all heard Christians make this claim;
“The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist”

Or:

QFD: Is Satan a symbolic representation of evil, portrayed through fictional imagery of Christian Mythology?

Re Christian Mythology:
["The greatest trick Christians ever played was to convince the world the Satan did exist"]

What is your position on the QFDs, and why?

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #11

Post by William »

[Replying to tam in post #10]
Might help to be reminded that everything that I posted came in response to the claim you made here:
The idea of Satan seems to have superstitiously evolved with Christianity. To the Hebrews, Satan appears to be fictitious imagery personifying evil.

It is likely then, that those Jews listening to Jesus never thought that Jesus was referring to an actual real person.
Fair enough. How about this then;

It is likely then that a percentage of Jews listening to Jesus never thought that Jesus was referring to an actual real person.
As I said, He spoke of the one called Satan as a real person.
As I said, some would have interpreted it that way. Others would not have.
Because certainly there were Jews who believed that the one called Satan was a real being. You seem to be in agreement with this.
Yes I am. Are you also in agreement with the similar statement, "certainly there were Jews who believed that the one called Satan was not a real being" ?
The point being that there are are actual evil beings, unclean spirits... meaning there is just no need to invent a make-believe bogeyman and call it Satan.
No.

The point is that it doesn't appear to matter if a Christian believes Satan is actually real or a mythological representation of evil.
Mary could forgive her grandfather anyway, for whatever reason he did what he did.
Jesus could also forgive Peter anyway, without anyone needing to add the extra layer of interpretation that Jesus was not dealing with Peter but another person entirely, called "Satan".
There's really no need to come up with a bogeyman called Satan. Other spirit beings (demons, unclean/lying spirits) are mentioned as being real as well,
There is really no need to come up with other boogie-men such as "demons, unclean/lying spirits" to explain Peter's or anyone's else's behavior.

It can be explained why Jesus referred to Peters behavior as being Satanic simply by understanding that Satan is a fictional representation of an actual thing, called "evil".

The only actual "evil beings, unclean spirits" are human beings who behave so. And even then, they are not so evil as to not be able to change their behavior.

It was Peter who chose to cut off the guards ear, not a real person called "Satan" who was in possession of Peters actions and underlying beliefs and emotions.

That extra layer of belief [Satan is a real person] is unnecessary in order to explain a humans behavior.

The bottom line is that since biblical Jesus never said "You must believe that Satan is a Real Person" there must be other reasons as to why Christians who want to believe that, choose to believe that, and those other reasons are surplus to requirement to being a Christian.

Online
User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5565
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #12

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
William wrote: Sun Nov 07, 2021 9:54 pm [Replying to tam in post #10]
Might help to be reminded that everything that I posted came in response to the claim you made here:
The idea of Satan seems to have superstitiously evolved with Christianity. To the Hebrews, Satan appears to be fictitious imagery personifying evil.

It is likely then, that those Jews listening to Jesus never thought that Jesus was referring to an actual real person.
Fair enough. How about this then;

It is likely then that a percentage of Jews listening to Jesus never thought that Jesus was referring to an actual real person.
Considering that the Sadducees were said not to have believed in angels, I'd say that would be a safe bet.

As I said, He spoke of the one called Satan as a real person.
As I said, some would have interpreted it that way. Others would not have.
Sure, people interpret things in all sorts of ways. Often to suit a personal belief or chosen theology.
Because certainly there were Jews who believed that the one called Satan was a real being. You seem to be in agreement with this.
Yes I am. Are you also in agreement with the similar statement, "certainly there were Jews who believed that the one called Satan was not a real being" ?
Sure. My point in responding to your post was just because you had said it was likely that those Jews listening to Christ never thought He was referring to a real being.
The point being that there are are actual evil beings, unclean spirits... meaning there is just no need to invent a make-believe bogeyman and call it Satan.
No.
Well, it was my point, William, sooooo...

Yes.
The point is that it doesn't appear to matter if a Christian believes Satan is actually real or a mythological representation of evil.
Doesn't appear to matter... to what?

Mary could forgive her grandfather anyway, for whatever reason he did what he did.
Jesus could also forgive Peter anyway, without anyone needing to add the extra layer of interpretation that Jesus was not dealing with Peter but another person entirely, called "Satan".
I'm not sure what the forgiveness has to do with it, but since Christ said, "Get thee behind me, Satan", there is no extra layer being added.

As for forgiveness, if we had no responsibility for our own actions, what would there be to forgive in the first place?

There's really no need to come up with a bogeyman called Satan. Other spirit beings (demons, unclean/lying spirits) are mentioned as being real as well,
There is really no need to come up with other boogie-men such as "demons, unclean/lying spirits" to explain Peter's or anyone's else's behavior.
I think you're missing the point.

Regardless, I only stated that such beings exist, and if such beings exist, then there is no need for someone to invent a make-believe bogeyman called Satan (as you seemed to suggest would be the reason for Satan to have been invented, in the case of Mary and her grandfather, so that there could be someone to blame, someone to eventually be punished).

It can be explained why Jesus referred to Peters behavior as being Satanic simply by understanding that Satan is a fictional representation of an actual thing, called "evil".
He did not refer to Peter's behavior as being Satanic though. Those were not His words. He said, "get thee behind me, Satan". Just as on another occasion, He said, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven." Revelation (which you do not accept) is clear on the matter as well. And as we seem to be in agreement, those Jews who were listening to Him also believed Satan existed as a real being.
The only actual "evil beings, unclean spirits" are human beings who behave so. And even then, they are not so evil as to not be able to change their behavior.
Well if you look up the accounts that I referenced in the previous post (Luke 10 and Mark 5, I believe) you will see that this is not at all how 'unclean spirits' are referred to.

Humans are humans. They are certainly capable of being evil; behaving evilly. It is also possible for them to repent and change their behavior.

But I'm not sure why it would be so hard to understand that seraphs (what most call angels), have those among them who are faithful to God and His Son and those among them who are bad. Unless of course you are saying there is no such thing as angels at all. But if you accept that there are (or might be) angels, then why not some who are faithful and some who are rebellious? Good and bad?
It was Peter who chose to cut off the guards ear, not a real person called "Satan" who was in possession of Peters actions and underlying beliefs and emotions.
Who said otherwise?

That extra layer of belief [Satan is a real person] is unnecessary in order to explain a humans behavior.
Sure, but that does not mean he is not a real being, one who 'prowls around like a lion looking for someone to devour'. One who accuses us of being faithful to God only when things are good, but if things are bad, that we will "curse God and die" in order to save our own skin. He can tempt and deceive, try and get people to doubt God and what He has said; in order to try and get people to turn away from God or to prevent people from coming TO God.

Hence, we are told to resist him (and he will flee), and to be sober-minded and alert. (James 4:7; 1Peter 5:8, 9)
The bottom line is that since biblical Jesus never said "You must believe that Satan is a Real Person" there must be other reasons as to why Christians who want to believe that, choose to believe that, and those other reasons are surplus to requirement to being a Christian.
Well I don't know who said anything about it being a requirement, but sometimes people just believe things because they are true, not because they WANT to believe them to be true.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #13

Post by William »

[Replying to tam in post #12]
And as we seem to be in agreement, those Jews who were listening to Him also believed Satan existed as a real being.
No. What Jews are you referring to, specific to this statement?
if such beings exist, then there is no need for someone to invent a make-believe bogeyman called Satan
There is no evidence that "such beings exist" and I didn't say people who believe Satan is a fictional figurative personification of evil, thought of this as a 'boogieman'.

My comment was that there is really no need to come up with other boogie-men such as "demons, unclean/lying spirits" to explain Peter's or anyone's else's behavior.

Satan is a fictional device not meant to be taken literally as an actual boogie-man, but is meant to represent evil human behavior.

It is like when a Christian believes that Hell is really not a place sinners go to suffer. They say that biblical Jesus was being "figurative" - even that it sounded like he was being literal.
He did not refer to Peter's behavior as being Satanic though.
He was being figurative nonetheless. "Satanic" is aligned with what Jesus accused Peter of doing - what was motivating Peters words. Satan is a figurative personification of such behavior - not literally an individual who has the power to trick the world into believing that he doesn't exist.
The only actual "evil beings, unclean spirits" are human beings who behave so. And even then, they are not so evil as to not be able to change their behavior.
Well if you look up the accounts that I referenced in the previous post (Luke 10 and Mark 5, I believe) you will see that this is not at all how 'unclean spirits' are referred to.
There is no mention of Satan being a real person in Mark 5. The idea of there being unclean spirits existing is not under question.

Generally we understand folk who hear voices and speak with voices that appear to be other than the voice of the one speaking, are suffering from personality disorders, which is something which can be dealt with in today's world without the necessity of having herds of swine nearby. or people in pairs casting out "unclean spirits".

In Luke 10: 17-20 Jesus is referring to figurative Satan [evil personified] as figurative lightening, but there is no context as to why he did so, other than the "seventy" Luke claims Jesus sent out achieving something by their actions...or are you saying that this was the moment when the 'real Satan' was hurled from Heaven to Earth, and Jesus was being literal re that?

It appears to me, [certainly possible] the author may have given himself some poetic license...as certainly there is poetry in the figurative nature of the subject.
The point being that there are are actual evil beings, unclean spirits...
While that may be the point you are attempting to make, there is no evidence of "actual evil beings, unclean spirits" and in order for one to believe that there are, one has to do so on faith, and faith-based points are insufficient for winning debates.

Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan is just that...Satan represents evil action, rather than a being who actually exists as a person.
To follow after Jesus, it is not necessary to believe Satan is a real person, any more than it is necessary to believe hell-fire is a real place where sinful persons are sent to suffer.

Online
User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5565
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #14

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
William wrote: Mon Nov 08, 2021 1:03 am [Replying to tam in post #12]
And as we seem to be in agreement, those Jews who were listening to Him also believed Satan existed as a real being.
No. What Jews are you referring to, specific to this statement?
The opposite percentage as you wrote here:

It is likely then that a percentage of Jews listening to Jesus never thought that Jesus was referring to an actual real person.

Satan is a fictional device not meant to be taken literally as an actual boogie-man, but is meant to represent evil human behavior.

It is like when a Christian believes that Hell is really not a place sinners go to suffer. They say that biblical Jesus was being "figurative" - even that it sounded like he was being literal.
I don't know what 'they' say, but hell (as in Hades/Sheol/the world of the dead) is indeed spoken of as a real place that many people go to when they die, conscious of nothing, until the resurrection of the dead. (Those in Christ go under the altar to await the first resurrection). There is no eternal torment in 'hell' though. Christ did not speak as though there was such a thing.

I have not seen you present evidence that "Satan" is a fictional device meant to represent evil human behavior.

The only actual "evil beings, unclean spirits" are human beings who behave so. And even then, they are not so evil as to not be able to change their behavior.
Well if you look up the accounts that I referenced in the previous post (Luke 10 and Mark 5, I believe) you will see that this is not at all how 'unclean spirits' are referred to.
There is no mention of Satan being a real person in Mark 5.
That is because Mark 5 was presented as evidence of unclean spirits, that we have evidence of Christ interacting with them as real beings.

This was presented to support the point that there is no need to invent Satan as a real being so that "mary" can have someone else to blame for her grandfather's behavior. If she wanted to, she could just blame one of these other beings instead. PLEASE NOTE that I am just going along with the example that you gave. I am not saying she should blame anyone other than her grandfather... only that there was never any need to invent 'satan' as a real being, just to find someone else to blame.


That being said, if a person does not believe there is an Adversary (or lying spirits), then it is harder to be on one's guard against them.

Generally we understand folk who hear voices and speak with voices that appear to be other than the voice of the one speaking, are suffering from personality disorders, which is something which can be dealt with in today's world without the necessity of having herds of swine nearby. or people in pairs casting out "unclean spirits".
Are you suggesting then that Christ was suffering from personality disorders?

In Luke 10: 17-20 Jesus is referring to figurative Satan [evil personified] as figurative lightening,


He is not referring to Satan as lightning (figurative or otherwise). He is using a simile to describe the FALL of Satan.

“I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven."


Its a simile. Same as seeing the spirit "descend from heaven like a dove". (John 1:32)
but there is no context as to why he did so, other than the "seventy" Luke claims Jesus sent out achieving something by their actions... or are you saying that this was the moment when the 'real Satan' was hurled from Heaven to Earth, and Jesus was being literal re that?
No. He is just describing what He saw. He is also telling them that instead of rejoicing that the spirits submit to them, they should instead rejoice that their names are written in heaven.

The point being that there are are actual evil beings, unclean spirits...
While that may be the point you are attempting to make, there is no evidence of "actual evil beings, unclean spirits"
The evidence is according to Christ and His exchanges with them (via the examples given).
and in order for one to believe that there are, one has to do so on faith, and faith-based points are insufficient for winning debates.
Well I certainly have no problem with admitting to faith - Christ builds His Church on Himself - the Rock - based upon faith, the same faith Peter showed when the Father revealed to him that Jaheshua is the Messiah, the Son of God.

I don't care about 'winning debates' (no one really wins a debate here anyway, and truth matters far more than 'winning a debate' to me), but if that is something you care about, then you might want to remember what section of the forum you are in. Because there is certainly much more evidence of Satan as a real being in other books (such as Revelation).

Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan is just that...Satan represents evil action, rather than a being who actually exists as a person.
I haven't seen you present any evidence for that yet.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #15

Post by William »

Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan is just that...Satan represents evil action, rather than a being who actually exists as a person.
I haven't seen you present any evidence for that yet.
As I said. Biblical Jesus does not say anywhere that Satan is a real person. Nor is it even written that we must believe such a thing.

Neither of us have given any evidence. What we have both done is simply present our own particular understanding of the interpretations available regarding biblical writ.

Which is precisely why "no one really wins a debate here anyway" because faith-based beliefs are non-negotiable from the go-get - even those the individual claims as 'the truth' because said truth while unproven - is still good enough for those who say so.

So I suppose if ever I am in argument with you about anything here anyway, I should stop and think about that, and not be drawn into non-debatable faith-based claims you make, because my words would be wasted?

Thanks for the heads up. ;)

Should we not only 'agree to disagree' but also to ignore each other on account that you are not here to debate anything, even if you are here to make comments about what others have to say?

Online
User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5565
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #16

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
William wrote: Mon Nov 08, 2021 4:33 pm
Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan is just that...Satan represents evil action, rather than a being who actually exists as a person.
I haven't seen you present any evidence for that yet.
As I said. Biblical Jesus does not say anywhere that Satan is a real person.


But Christ does speak of the Adversary (the one called Satan) as a real person.

You might be suggesting that Christ did not mean it that way, but you have yet to present any evidence in support of that claim, or of the claim that "Satan represents evil action, rather than a being who actually exists as a person."

On the other hand:

You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out his desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, refusing to uphold the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, because he is a liar and the father of lies.


“Simon, Simon, Satan has asked to sift all of you as wheat. 32 But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers.”


In addition, the Adversary is depicted as a real person in the OT, as well as by those Jews who listened to and followed Christ, and in the book of Revelation. Examples of these things (except from Revelation) have been presented in various previous posts.



**

If you wish to ignore me and my posts, by all means, feel free to do so.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #17

Post by William »

[Replying to tam in post #16]
But Christ does speak of the Adversary (the one called Satan) as a real person.
Only in as much as it can be interpreted that way, which is the overall point I have been making re that.
You might be suggesting that Christ did not mean it that way, but you have yet to present any evidence in support of that claim, or of the claim that "Satan represents evil action, rather than a being who actually exists as a person."
I present the same evidence as you do Tam. The only difference is in how we each interpret said evidence. I don't go so far as to say that the way I interpret it is true or false. I say the same for all interpretations, not matter tha some accompany their interpretations with statements along the lines of "MY interpretation is the truth" thereby implying any contrary interpretation is a lie.
If you wish to ignore me and my posts, by all means, feel free to do so.
Thanks for your permission, not - of course - that I need it.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #18

Post by William »

[Replying to tam in post #14]
Generally we understand folk who hear voices and speak with voices that appear to be other than the voice of the one speaking, are suffering from personality disorders, which is something which can be dealt with in today's world without the necessity of having herds of swine nearby. or people in pairs casting out "unclean spirits".
Are you suggesting then that Christ was suffering from personality disorders?
Not in the above, no.

I am speaking of the tomb dweller in the storyline. The person with the multiple personalities.

I tend to think that the story itself is more likely to be an invention of the author rather than based upon anything he actual eye-witnessed.

My reasoning behind that, has to do with;

IF;

Jesus understood the human condition

THEN;

He would have known that the tomb dweller was suffering from personality disorder rather than from being manipulated by 'unclean spirits.'



_______
If the author of the story was someone who thought of swine as 'unclean' and wanted to place the 'unclean spirits' somewhere more suitable, the inclusion of a heard of swine conveniently available nearby for the job is inventive.

Suffering from personality disorders is something most - if not all - humans do, to one degree or another.

My overall point about the 'unclean spirits' story is that the author [understandably] didn't know what he was talking about and would be told so in today's more understanding world.

That is why I cannot accept your belief that Satan is a real person, or that unclean spirits cause personality disorders.

Here is an example of what I think is compelling evidence in support of my position on the matter of belief in unclean spirits being actually real.

Eleanor tells it as it really is.



To me, biblical Christ comes across - through Christianity's telling of it - to be like Lucifer trying to change the way the world sees he and his father and thus, how we see ourselves in said world.

Online
User avatar
tam
Savant
Posts: 5565
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 4:59 pm
Has thanked: 244 times
Been thanked: 205 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #19

Post by tam »

Peace to you,
William wrote: Tue Nov 09, 2021 1:32 pm [Replying to tam in post #16]
But Christ does speak of the Adversary (the one called Satan) as a real person.
Only in as much as it can be interpreted that way,
It does not require interpretation. It is the straightforward reading. Evidence being that Satan is referred to as an individual person. A being whose native language is lies, a being who deceives, who is a murderer from the beginning, who accuses, who is the father of lies, and someone who asked to sift disciples/apostles as wheat.

You might be suggesting that Christ did not mean it that way, but you have yet to present any evidence in support of that claim, or of the claim that "Satan represents evil action, rather than a being who actually exists as a person."
I present the same evidence as you do Tam.


I went back and read, and the only argument that I saw you make was that because Christ employed Satan in parables, that suggests that Christ considered the character to be a fictional representation of actual evil.


To that:

Christ mentions God in some of His parables, but that does not mean Christ considered God to be a fictional representation of actual good. Christ mentions himself in parables (as the King, or the Owner's son, or the Son of Man, etc), and that certainly does not mean that Christ considered himself to be a fictional representation of something else.


**

In addition to that:


The parable that mentions Satan (from Mark):

“Listen! A farmer went out to sow his seed. 4 As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path, and the birds came and ate it up. 5 Some fell on rocky places, where it did not have much soil. It sprang up quickly, because the soil was shallow. 6 But when the sun came up, the plants were scorched, and they withered because they had no root. 7 Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up and choked the plants, so that they did not bear grain. 8 Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up, grew and produced a crop, some multiplying thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times.”


Please note that Satan is not even mentioned in the parable. Satan is mentioned in the EXPLANATION of the parable. When it is being explained what everything in the parable stands for.

The farmer sows the word. 15 Some people are like seed along the path, where the word is sown. As soon as they hear it, Satan comes and takes away the word that was sown in them. 16 Others, like seed sown on rocky places, hear the word and at once receive it with joy. 17 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 18 Still others, like seed sown among thorns, hear the word; 19 but the worries of this life, the deceitfulness of wealth and the desires for other things come in and choke the word, making it unfruitful. 20 Others, like seed sown on good soil, hear the word, accept it, and produce a crop—some thirty, some sixty, some a hundred times what was sown.”


He is outright stating in each instance the specific cause of the problem to each group of people:

1 - Satan
2 - Trouble and persecution because of the word
3 - Worries of life and deceitfulness of of wealth




In another parable, the parable of the weeds:

“The kingdom of heaven is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. 25 But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. 26 When the wheat sprouted and formed heads, then the weeds also appeared.

27 “The owner’s servants came to him and said, ‘Sir, didn’t you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from?’

28 “‘An enemy did this,’ he replied.

“The servants asked him, ‘Do you want us to go and pull them up?’

29 “‘No,’ he answered, ‘because while you are pulling the weeds, you may uproot the wheat with them. 30 Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn.’”


The EXPLANATION:

“The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. 38 The field is the world, and the good seed stands for the people of the kingdom. The weeds are the people of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels.

40 “As the weeds are pulled up and burned in the fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send out his angels, and they will weed out of his kingdom everything that causes sin and all who do evil. 42 They will throw them into the blazing furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Whoever has ears, let them hear.


Note that He very clearly identifies the various subjects in the parable.

- The one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man.

- The field is the world.

- The good seed is the people of the kingdom.

- The weeds are the people of the evil one.

- The enemy who sowed the weeds is the devil.

- The harvest is the end of the age.

- The harvesters are angels.


No other thing being identified there is a fictional representation of something else.

User avatar
William
Savant
Posts: 10483
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2012 8:11 pm
Location: Te Waipounamu
Has thanked: 494 times
Been thanked: 1129 times
Contact:

Re: Christian Mythology and The Image of Satan

Post #20

Post by William »

[Replying to tam in post #19]
It does not require interpretation. It is the straightforward reading.
If that were the case, we wouldn't be here debating it together.
Evidence being that Satan is referred to as an individual person.
Fictional characters can be presented that way. That is what the parables were, and why biblical Jesus [BJ] used that style of storytelling.

So, just because characters are presented as real, does not mean that the are.

There needs to be more evidence presented, if you want to convince me that Satan is real, rather than fictional.

One such thing you would need to explain is why there is so much good in the world, if Satan was actually a real being doing whatever it is he is doing in relation to The Earth.
A being whose native language is lies, a being who deceives, who is a murderer from the beginning, who accuses, who is the father of lies, ...
That is exactly what I am referring to re "Christian Mythology Devices" and the evolving image Tam.

Satan is "this" and "that" according to the rumors, but where is the evidence?
...and someone who asked to sift disciples/apostles as wheat.
That is a new byte of information Tam. I have not see the expression before. What do you interpret that to mean?

I interpret it to mean that every disciple has their own devils to deal with and work out what they are.

As a device, that can be motivating, but if one were to confuse that with there being an actual Satan, then whatever one places upon the imagery, is whatever is within ones psyche, and come out that way.
I went back and read, and the only argument that I saw you make was that because Christ employed Satan in parables, that suggests that Christ considered the character to be a fictional representation of actual evil.
Yes.
To that:

Christ mentions God in some of His parables, but that does not mean Christ considered God to be a fictional representation of actual good. Christ mentions himself in parables (as the King, or the Owner's son, or the Son of Man, etc), and that certainly does not mean that Christ considered himself to be a fictional representation of something else.
I interpret that, thus;

BJ would have known that there is One God but there are many gods which are fictional. BJ would have also known that even in coming through the Hebrew aspect of Humanity, he would have to deal with the fiction placed upon God, within that culture.

That is why there are weeds among the crop. Fictional Satan points out those weeds.

The Christ today would have ample evidence that humans did place images on that as well - one lone person against the world. The Christ today would know that those images are fiction.

Fictional Example;
______
Situation: [scene]
"It happens and therefore contingency enters the equation ..."

Christ: "They think I am someone I am not"

The Father: "Tell me about it..."
______

In addition to that:


The parable that mentions Satan (from Mark):
Exactly!

Satan was keep in the fiction section, next to the stories about Robin and his Merry Men. In between that and Peter Pan.
Satan comes and takes away the word
In parable, yes.

In reality, the individual is the one performing that role - and the performance is all internal.
Satan is just an easier way to say the same thing, as it is less likely to hurt the feelings of the Chosen Righteous Folk they could potential become, if they can make a scapegoat image and chuck all their evil onto said image.

So when it reads Satan chokes the word it is referring to the individual personalities own choice to choke the word, and even the use of the word 'choke' is not to be taken literally. It is figurative of "Willful Ignorance" and that can be traced directly to the fear-emotion.

I have wondered at just how messy things got, as the image of Satan evolved in the World to be more and more scary and corrupt looking...and to whether this applies to the inner workings of those who believe in such images to being 'real' and 'true', even the images of Satan they create for themselves.
He is outright stating in each instance the specific cause of the problem to each group of people:

1 - Satan
2 - Trouble and persecution because of the word
3 - Worries of life and deceitfulness of of wealth
And if I take these points and place them behind another type of interpretation filter, I get;

1: Individual Personality Defect resulting in acts of willful ignorance
2: Needing to point the blame elsewhere and thus protagonist/antagonist inventions
3: Getting on with living ones life under those false impressions.

________

BJ effectively showed two curtains when using parables. The first revealed a truth which could possibly result in they who saw it, to step in that direction.
The second revealed even more that was concealed behind the first. But only to those who had eyes to see.

Thus, an important part of the process of sorting wheat from weeds is firmly in place.

"The Two Curtains" are fictional representation of what actually exists within every Human as a process. One can go so far as to draw aside the first curtain, but willfully choose not to draw the aside the second curtain, fearfully settling for what the first curtain reveals.

I wrote a song about it. The poem is called ::

THEATRE OF THE MIND

and is a fictional representation of a real event - well really in that I am the only one who experienced it as real so a fictional representation of a possibly fictional event that happened to me.




Post Reply