Edit: grammar

  • Pratai@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Don’t bother trying to make any of it make sense. And don’t bother trying to reason with those that believe it. If you’re an actual atheist, just move on with your belief and pay no attention to the beliefs of others. They should be just as irrelevant to you as your belief should be to them.

    Now, if you’re a Reddit atheist, I think you’re supposed to throw a hateful insult-ladened temper tantrum about how Christian are insulting and short fused. At least that’s what it seems anyway.

    If it is neither…. Cool musing!

  • kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    The problem is that God is allegedly light (1 John 1:5).

    Light is its own opposite (a photon’s anti-particle is identical to itself).

    So there cannot be a Satan that’s the opposite of a God of light.

    Also, the addition of Satan as a supernatural adversary in the Abrahamic tradition was probably the result of a later editor needing to change Anat petitioning El to kill the son of the protagonist as adapted from the earlier polytheistic Tale of Aqhat to set up the adapted dialogue of suffering from the Babylonian Theodicy into a monotheistic version and just replaced the goddess’ name with the generic term ‘adversary.’ So there’s the whole later fanfiction as just the result of a lazy editor adapting a polytheistic earlier story to a monotheistic version going against the whole ‘Satan’ thing too.

    • groggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      9 months ago

      What an amazing rabbit hole to go down. Thanks for teaching me something new! Fascinating religion with quite the history.

      • Artemis@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        9 months ago

        Fun fact: St. Augustine started out as a Manichaean! Super interesting stuff even from a purely philosophical POV.

  • DarkMetatron@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Satan/Lucifer is not the opposite of God but a opposing force to the creation and will of God. Lucifer is kind of the oldest teenager with a bad case of “I hate my creator” temper tantrum ever.

    In that way Lucifer itself is already the antichrist, he is just missing a corporal manifestation on earth.

    Well and Lucifer is, a lot like the named angels, Jesus and all the saints, a great loophole for monotheistic Christian religion around the first commandment.

    edit notes: Corrected german written Luzifer to Lucifer

      • DarkMetatron@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        9 months ago

        In German he is written with a z, “Luzifer”, and my tired German brain just took that instead of the correct English writing. Sorry for that! 🫣

  • Ekybio@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    9 months ago

    Me: “Interesting thought.”

    Me after reading the comments: “This shit is more complex then family relationships in Austrian Royalty.”

  • Bizarroland@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    I think your logic is messed up somewhere.

    Jesus is the Christ, Christ being the word for “the anointed one” or “the chosen one” or “the Messiah”.

    An antichrist would be one that is the opposite of “the Messiah” or “the chosen one” or “the anointed one”, they wouldn’t have to be the complete and total opposite of Jesus to count.

    • CrazyEddie041@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      9 months ago

      My favorite (probably inaccurate) point about the name “Jesus Christ”: the name “Christ” means “anointed one”, as you said. People were generally anointed by having oil poured on their head. “Jesus” is just contemporary form of the name “Joshua”. So in another life, “Jesus Christ” could literally be translated as “Oily Josh”.

      • Bizarroland@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        I feel like if Jesus were alive now the name oily josh would be like that horrible childhood nickname that he hates

    • Masimatutu@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      9 months ago

      First of all, this is not logic. This is just a dumb thought experiment.

      And secondly, something as complex as a person will never have a true opposite, so you will be looking at the defining feature of that person. In the case of Jesus Christ, a lot of peoply would say that “son of God” is his defining feature.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        In the case of Jesus Christ, a lot of peoply would say that “son of God” is his defining feature.

        Pretty sure they’d instead focus on the whole “sacrifice for all of mankind’s sins” thing but maybe we just know different people

  • evdo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    9 months ago

    And Jesus is an incarnation/aspect of God (at least in the version I’m most familiar with), right? It’s some kinda bizarre circle

  • jay91@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    The question is, why the god would give a freewill to the humans but not the angles? aren’t we all his creation? why god punishes the angels for opposition but still give the humans the best shape who do worst? all these are Myths, there is no such a Satan, the human viciousness is the satan we afraid of. there is nothing eviler than the human rampage causing harm.

  • db2@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    If you try to make actual sense of these things you’re gonna have a bad time. They’re not made for people capable of thinking.

    • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      It’s not that they’re incapable (at least not all), they just turn it off when it comes to religion.

      My parents are staunchly evangelical to this day, and I’ve heard my father use logic and critical thinking on multiple occasions, even identifying things like non sequitur and Occam’s razor when it comes to following a train of thought through. I’ve literally witnessed him using the same logic atheists use to disprove islam.

      Unfortunately they’re trained from birth to believe that…

      1. Doubting the Bible is heinous and will put your salvation in jeopardy.

      2. Everything that contradicts the Bible is just a plot from the devil to ruin your salvation.

      Once you ingrain those ideas into a very malleable 3-4 year old mind, it’s incredibly difficult for them to remove their emotional attachment from the specific religion they’re a part of so that they can use the same logic they employ on other philosophies into their own.

      It’s like a mental block, or a thought virus. They terminate any and all logic when it comes specifically to their religious beliefs (and politics, because it’s the same thing for modern fundies.)

  • three@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    if someone reads a fairy tale and believes it’s real does that make it real?