Theistic Satanism (Age Of Aquarius) Discussion (Continued)

[mymistake]

 

What is this evidence you speak of? 

 

Multiple vetted eyewitness accounts from credible witnesses among others.

 

 

Fundies sure are good for a laugh.

[Fernweh]

 

What is this evidence you speak of? 

 

Multiple vetted eyewitness accounts from credible witnesses among others.

 

Oh Bollocks!

[◊ crazyguy123 ◊]

I was thinking he was a troll or POE.

 

What is a POE?

[OrdinaryClay]

 

 

What is this evidence you speak of? 

 

Multiple vetted eyewitness accounts from credible witnesses among others.

 

I don't know if you could consider that as evidence. What this really is, is people having an experience that can not be explained, but the people who have these experiences label the cause as something they already believe in, without knowing what the real cause of the unexplained experience may be.

It is evidence. That it is evidence for the supernatural is very strong. That it is evidence for satan I infer based on multiple factors. It is an inference to the best explanation. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inference_to_the_best_explanation

[OrdinaryClay]

 

I was thinking he was a troll or POE.

 

What is a POE?

I'm glad you asked that question. I was wondering myself.

[Astreja]

OC, your alleged evidence simply isn't up to our standards here.  Because it's so trivially easy for people to imagine up supernatural experiences and entities that seem real (imagined up a few Myself, in fact), I am no longer accepting any testimony as evidence for the supernatural.  I now require objective and testable physical evidence, including (but not limited to) an in-person, physical manifestation by the alleged god or anti-god.

 

Otherwise, dear fellow, I shall be obligated to ask *you* to accept the following report:

 

On the evening of Friday, January 25, 2013, My best friend witnessed a manifestation of the divine powers of Myself, Astreja K. Odinsdóttir (Goddess of the Northern Hemisphere Vernal Equinox, chocolate, punctuation, and Random Equipment Malfunctions).  While in attendance at a local restaurant, I was drying My hands in the washroom.  The dryer suddenly stopped working and would not restart when I put My hands back into the air-blade unit.  My friend tried it; it worked fine for her.  I tried it again; nothing.  She tried it, and again it worked.  I tried it for a third time, and again the unit failed.

 

So why are you not worshipping Me like the Goddess I am?   

[◊ crazyguy123 ◊]

 

 

 

What is this evidence you speak of? 

 

Multiple vetted eyewitness accounts from credible witnesses among others.

 

I don't know if you could consider that as evidence. What this really is, is people having an experience that can not be explained, but the people who have these experiences label the cause as something they already believe in, without knowing what the real cause of the unexplained experience may be.

It is evidence. That it is evidence for the supernatural is very strong. That it is evidence for satan I infer based on multiple factors. It is an inference to the best explanation. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inference_to_the_best_explanation

 

Alright, I would actually like to see who has witnessed what they think is the actions of Satan, as depicted in the Bible. I looked around online to find "evidence of Satan's existence" and found nothing useful. I did not find any eyewitness accounts of demon possession or of actions of Satan himself.

 

Also, there is a problem with the logic used to explain what you believe to be evidence of Satan's existence. On the wikipedia example of abductive reasoning, when it says "The lawn is wet", it's probably reasonable to conclude that it rained. But without actually seeing the rain, if it was early in the morning, you can't conclude that the lawn is wet because it rained. It could simply have been the morning dew and may not have rained.

 

When it comes to explaining the unexplainable, just because a person believes that (hypothesis A) is the only logical conclusion, does not mean that it is so. There could be other explanations for what is occurring, without people knowing or even caring about finding out what these other possible explanations are.

 

So, to prove that Satan is real, there are some very important questions that must be answered before one could believe that Satan is an actual being.

 

1. Did someone witness events that could have been done by Satan and/or demons serving Satan?

2. Are the witnesses credible sources?

3. If the witnesses are credible sources, could the cause of the unexplainable event be something other than Satan and/or demons serving Satan?

 

As far as I know, with what you have provided, only question #1 has been answered with certainty, but I don't yet know about question #2. I will keep looking for these eye-witness accounts you speak of, hoping to find out if the witnesses you mentioned really are credible and whether or not what they experienced could have been something other than the actions of Satan and/or demons serving Satan.

 

I have no problem believing that the existence of the supernatural is possible, but if something supernatural, or something that seems to be supernatural, occurs, we can't just label everything as "caused by Satan as depicted in the Bible" or "caused by God as depicted in the Bible". Without having a full understanding of the supernatural, if people really have experienced something supernatural, we can't just label it with whatever we want. If people do that, they could easily be wrong about the actual cause of the supernatural event.

[mymistake]

 

I was thinking he was a troll or POE.

 

What is a POE?

 

A POE is an atheist who has a talent for sarcasim and pretends to be a lunatic Christian in order to troll online forums.

 

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Poe%27s_Law

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Poe%27s%20Law

 

Personally, I think Ordinary Clay is an authentic lunatic.  He is the real deal.  He has deluded himself into thinking that his imagination really did create the entire universe and yet also loves him enough to have a personal relationship with him.

[Joshpantera]

So this kid who was forced to go to Christian church all his life and hated it, dreamed up an image of the churches ultimate enemy, Satan. All this while going for an astral projection meditation - a mind altering state. Then, just as in Gnostic belief, the boy comes up with the idea that the serpent was good and the creator God was bad. And then decides to devote his life to serving Satan who he still thinks was the serpent in the Garden myth as he was taught in church, because, after all, the kid doesn't know enough about the mythology yet to understand that Satan is a late edition to the mythology.

 

Quite the mind f@#$k we have going on here, eh?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJCxcez5U0M

[OrdinaryClay]

 

 

 

 

What is this evidence you speak of? 

 

Multiple vetted eyewitness accounts from credible witnesses among others.

 

I don't know if you could consider that as evidence. What this really is, is people having an experience that can not be explained, but the people who have these experiences label the cause as something they already believe in, without knowing what the real cause of the unexplained experience may be.

It is evidence. That it is evidence for the supernatural is very strong. That it is evidence for satan I infer based on multiple factors. It is an inference to the best explanation. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inference_to_the_best_explanation

 

Alright, I would actually like to see who has witnessed what they think is the actions of Satan, as depicted in the Bible. I looked around online to find "evidence of Satan's existence" and found nothing useful. I did not find any eyewitness accounts of demon possession or of actions of Satan himself.

 

http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0308-gallagher

 

Also, there is a problem with the logic used to explain what you believe to be evidence of Satan's existence. On the wikipedia example of abductive reasoning, when it says "The lawn is wet", it's probably reasonable to conclude that it rained. But without actually seeing the rain, if it was early in the morning, you can't conclude that the lawn is wet because it rained. It could simply have been the morning dew and may not have rained.

 

When it comes to explaining the unexplainable, just because a person believes that (hypothesis A) is the only logical conclusion, does not mean that it is so. There could be other explanations for what is occurring, without people knowing or even caring about finding out what these other possible explanations are.

The alternate explanatins must be more plausible than the one we choose.

 

So, to prove that Satan is real, there are some very important questions that must be answered before one could believe that Satan is an actual being.

 

1. Did someone witness events that could have been done by Satan and/or demons serving Satan?

2. Are the witnesses credible sources?

3. If the witnesses are credible sources, could the cause of the unexplainable event be something other than Satan and/or demons serving Satan?

https://www.google.com/search?q=rain+man+demonic+possession+decker+stroudsburg

 

 

I have no problem believing that the existence of the supernatural is possible, but if something supernatural, or something that seems to be supernatural, occurs, we can't just label everything as "caused by Satan as depicted in the Bible" or "caused by God as depicted in the Bible".

 

I agree. What do you think causes supernatural events.

 

Without having a full understanding of the supernatural, if people really have experienced something supernatural, we can't just label it with whatever we want.

...

If people do that, they could easily be wrong about the actual cause of the supernatural event.

We can still make inferences based on multiple events gathered over time. We can converge on the best explanation.

 

 

 

[Joshpantera]

^ Yes, and the best explanation will have to involve the fact that the myth of Lucifer / Satan is completely deconstructable and evidently is the product of gradual mythological evolution gaining in complexity over time from initial vague simplicity.

 

That has to be considered first and foremost when approaching anything that has to do with a Satanic claim. The simplest or best explanation can never be concluding on a literal Satan which is an evident literary construct, astro-mythological allegory mixed together with a metaphorical reference for certain tendencies in the human psyche, at best.

[Ravenstar]

Archetypes (I don't personalize nature - don't need to, some do... I asked a friend once why she did, and she said it made it easier for her to relate to the concepts if she anthropomorphized.. so that's one answer)

 

Read Jung... 'Man and his Symbol's' is good.. and anything he wrote on Archetypes and also the Shadow.

 

Humans are also amazingly good at 'projection' - disassociating themselves from their own psychology, especially the icky parts.

[◊ crazyguy123 ◊]

 

 

It is evidence. That it is evidence for the supernatural is very strong. That it is evidence for satan I infer based on multiple factors. It is an inference to the best explanation. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inference_to_the_best_explanation

 

 

 

Alright, I would actually like to see who has witnessed what they think is the actions of Satan, as depicted in the Bible. I looked around online to find "evidence of Satan's existence" and found nothing useful. I did not find any eyewitness accounts of demon possession or of actions of Satan himself.

 

http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0308-gallagher

 

Interesting article. If there really is good evidence as this article suggests, that possessions, oppression, and infestation happens, then how could anyone possibly know what the actual cause of these events is?

 

 

 

 

 

Also,

there is a problem with the logic used to explain what you believe to

be evidence of Satan's existence. On the wikipedia example of abductive

reasoning, when it says "The lawn is wet", it's probably reasonable to

conclude that it rained. But without actually seeing the rain, if it was

early in the morning, you can't conclude that the lawn is wet because

it rained. It could simply have been the morning dew and may not have

rained.

 

When it comes to explaining the unexplainable,

just because a person believes that (hypothesis A) is the only logical

conclusion, does not mean that it is so. There could be other

explanations for what is occurring, without people knowing or even

caring about finding out what these other possible explanations are.

The alternate explanations must be more plausible than the one we choose.

 

>>So,

to prove that Satan is real, there are some very important questions

that must be answered before one could believe that Satan is an actual

being.

 

1. Did someone witness events that could have been done by Satan and/or demons serving Satan?

2. Are the witnesses credible sources?

3.

If the witnesses are credible sources, could the cause of the

unexplainable event be something other than Satan and/or demons serving

Satan?

https://www.google.com/search?q=rain+man+demonic+possession+decker+stroudsburg

 

 

I noticed a spelling error in your text. I hope you do not mind that I corrected it in the quote of what you said.

 

You're right that the alternate explanations must be more plausible than the one you choose. If there are other explanations, then I certainly do not know what they are. However, it is a fact that quite a few things in the Bible are incorrect. There may be bits and pieces within it that actually provide information and/or contain good stuff in it, but most of it is crap. Therefore, any explanation could be more credible than your explanation.

 

As for this rain man situation with the demonic possession, I honestly have no idea what caused that, if it's not actually just some big hoax. From what I had read about Don Decker, maybe an evil spirit could have been involved. Could it have been something other than a demon? I don't know and you really don't know. Neither of us could possibly know what caused this. Unfortunately, some people just can't settle with "I don't know" and they go with whatever explanation they want for it.

 

Why the pages of a Bible used to fight off whatever this thing was did not get wet, according to the source I found, I don't know why. The fact that reading the Bible caused whatever was possessing Don to disappear is something I also do not know how to explain. However, I could try to explain another, unconsidered possibility, with a little humor.

 

Now, the spirit that did the possessing could have just left because it got annoyed by the Bible being read to it. Or it could have just gotten bored with Don at about the same time the Bible reading took place, so the Bible may have had nothing to do with it.

 

Also, I've brought up this point with Christians many times. Based on what the Bible says about god, I have brought up that he must either be: A) a man-made invention, B ), a demon that pretends to be a god, or C) the universe really has been created by a psychotic monster. So, the different personality traits attributed to the Bible god could have been given to him by both people making stuff up and possibly, if supernatural beings do exist, a demon could have screwed around with the heads of people for most of the Earth's history, easily gaining the traits that would warrant my description of "psychotic monster" when describing the Bible god Yahweh.

 

As far as the Bible pages not getting wet, there is a possibility that this demon screwing around with the heads of the ancient Hebrews could have been screwing around with Don and then at the same time, making it look like the Bible had some kind of supernatural power, that it really did not have, to screw around with the minds of gullible people who did not require scientific explanations for everything. I could easily imagine a demon doing so. If that was what happened, then it means that there really is a demon that did pretend to be Yahweh to screw around with people, just for laughs or for sadistic entertainment.

 

 

 

I

have no problem believing that the existence of the supernatural is

possible, but if something supernatural, or something that seems to be

supernatural, occurs, we can't just label everything as "caused by Satan

as depicted in the Bible" or "caused by God as depicted in the Bible".

 

I agree. What do you think causes supernatural events.

 

>>Without

having a full understanding of the supernatural, if people really have

experienced something supernatural, we can't just label it with whatever

we want.

...

If people do that, they could easily be wrong about the actual cause of the supernatural event.

We can still make inferences based on multiple events gathered over time. We can converge on the best explanation.

 

 

I honestly have no idea what causes supernatural events, assuming that they actually do.

 

Based on what I know of the Bible, I actually do not consider what it says about God and devils to be the best explanation for supernatural events.

[mymistake]

 

http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0308-gallagher

The free part is theology.  If I pay money do I get to see science?  I doubt that so much that they won't get any money from me.  An article that is going to do serious science shouldn't start with theology.  Bad form.

 

 

 

"The alternate explanatins must be more plausible than the one we choose."

 

The most plausible explanation is that the witnesses are mistaken.

 

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=rain+man+demonic+possession+decker+stroudsburg

 

Again, you are the guy who kills his own credibility.

 

 

"What do you think causes supernatural events."

 

What supernatural events?  None are known to have happened.  They are not caused by anything because they don't exist.

 

 

"We can still make inferences based on multiple events gathered over time. We can converge on the best explanation."

 

The best explanation is that it's all imaginary.

 

 

 

[OrdinaryClay]

^ Yes, and the best explanation will have to involve the fact that the myth of Lucifer / Satan is completely deconstructable and evidently is the product of gradual mythological evolution gaining in complexity over time from initial vague simplicity.

 

That has to be considered first and foremost when approaching anything that has to do with a Satanic claim. The simplest or best explanation can never be concluding on a literal Satan which is an evident literary construct, astro-mythological allegory mixed together with a metaphorical reference for certain tendencies in the human psyche, at best.

Sure you can believe that, but it is not a logical position to hold.

[bornagainathiest]

Your time is running out, OC.

[Ravenstar]

 

^ Yes, and the best explanation will have to involve the fact that the myth of Lucifer / Satan is completely deconstructable and evidently is the product of gradual mythological evolution gaining in complexity over time from initial vague simplicity.

 

That has to be considered first and foremost when approaching anything that has to do with a Satanic claim. The simplest or best explanation can never be concluding on a literal Satan which is an evident literary construct, astro-mythological allegory mixed together with a metaphorical reference for certain tendencies in the human psyche, at best.

Sure you can believe that, but it is not a logical position to hold.

You made an assertion...but you didn't back it up with any actual facts. So, point out how that is not a logical statement if you disagree. Otherwise it's just, blah, blah, blah...

 

If you know anything about the ancient Hebrews and other contemporary mythologies as well, the development of the satan figure is an obvious progression from a concept to an anthropomorphic figure. It is firmly based in Zoroastrianism (Persian - which the Hebrews were deeply exposed to - has an 'adversary' - Angra Mainyu) to begin with, and then takes on the characteristics of various pagan gods throughout the ages until we have the figure that today is known as the devil. Even the 'horns' of the devil come from the Roman god Pan (as well as the cloven feet) and Cerunnos from celtic mythology. etc... etc...

 

Th gods of yesterday become the demons of today.

[OrdinaryClay]

Archetypes (I don't personalize nature - don't need to, some do... I asked a friend once why she did, and she said it made it easier for her to relate to the concepts if she anthropomorphized.. so that's one answer)

So your friend admitted she needed a god concept. Most people try and deny it so that is refreshing. So we have people who 1) talk to the spirits as if they were sentient, 2) experience events that are not explainable given science. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's probably a duck. I think these people are deceiving themselves.

 

 

Read Jung... 'Man and his Symbol's' is good.. and anything he wrote on Archetypes and also the Shadow.

Jung's work is not science. It is an idea that holds as much weight as any one else's idea. You have to ask yourself what the origins of these proposed "archetypes" are. What do you think their origins are?

 

 

Humans are also amazingly good at 'projection' - disassociating themselves from their own psychology, especially the icky parts.

This does not allow us to extrapolate these projections to universal archetypes. It is an unwarranted leap.

[mcdaddy]

I see OC keeps coming back here.  

 

I can't even begin to understand the most basic question, WHY?

 

You DO realize that none of your hopeless, bullshit-filled, quote, unquote (air quotes) "arguments" are going to fool anyone here into believing in your mythology, correct?  Well, I guess the answer is obvious on that one.  That must be why you're here.  To re-convert.  

 

I see that some like engaging you to try and encourage you to use reason, but apparently you've redefined all those fancy words such as logic, education, understanding etc ad nauseum to suit your needs.  

 

You're really unbelievable, man.

[Joshpantera]

 

^ Yes, and the best explanation will have to involve the fact that the myth of Lucifer / Satan is completely deconstructable and evidently is the product of gradual mythological evolution gaining in complexity over time from initial vague simplicity.

 

That has to be considered first and foremost when approaching anything that has to do with a Satanic claim. The simplest or best explanation can never be concluding on a literal Satan which is an evident literary construct, astro-mythological allegory mixed together with a metaphorical reference for certain tendencies in the human psyche, at best.

Sure you can believe that, but it is not a logical position to hold.

Excuse me?

 

That's precisely the most logical way of approaching it. It is an established fact that Satan is a concept that didn't appear in full form. It took time to develop. That's not the ear marks of something that started out literal, historical, and full established at the outset.

 

You're wrong again old boy...

[Ravenstar]

"So your friend admitted she needed a god concept. Most people try and
deny it so that is refreshing. So we have people who 1) talk to the
spirits as if they were sentient, 2) experience events that are not
explainable given science. If it walks like a duck and quacks like a
duck it's probably a duck. I think these people are deceiving
themselves."

 

No.. she did NOT admit she needed a 'god' concept. She admitted it was easier to conceptualize things like feminine and masculine aspects of nature by seeing it as HUMAN, not a god (or goddess). She's not asking those concepts (abstractions) for favors.. sheesh. There is no experiencing unexplainable events either...where did that come from?  You are placing your own view and interpretation in here.. not hers. (or mine, and I was a pagan for quite a while - still am on some level)

 

Greek mythology is the root (expression) of archetypes. (archetypes are based on human psychology, hence Jung)

 

Must be boring looking out at the world from an ivory tower through an arrow slit. You miss most of the scenery.

[OrdinaryClay]

As for this rain man situation with the demonic possession, I honestly have no idea what caused that, if it's not actually just some big hoax. From what I had read about Don Decker, maybe an evil spirit could have been involved. Could it have been something other than a demon? I don't know and you really don't know. Neither of us could possibly know what caused this. Unfortunately, some people just can't settle with "I don't know" and they go with whatever explanation they want for it.

 

Why the pages of a Bible used to fight off whatever this thing was did not get wet, according to the source I found, I don't know why. The fact that reading the Bible caused whatever was possessing Don to disappear is something I also do not know how to explain. However, I could try to explain another, unconsidered possibility, with a little humor.

 

Now, the spirit that did the possessing could have just left because it got annoyed by the Bible being read to it. Or it could have just gotten bored with Don at about the same time the Bible reading took place, so the Bible may have had nothing to do with it.

 

Also, I've brought up this point with Christians many times. Based on what the Bible says about god, I have brought up that he must either be: A) a man-made invention, B ), a demon that pretends to be a god, or C) the universe really has been created by a psychotic monster. So, the different personality traits attributed to the Bible god could have been given to him by both people making stuff up and possibly, if supernatural beings do exist, a demon could have screwed around with the heads of people for most of the Earth's history, easily gaining the traits that would warrant my description of "psychotic monster" when describing the Bible god Yahweh.

 

As far as the Bible pages not getting wet, there is a possibility that this demon screwing around with the heads of the ancient Hebrews could have been screwing around with Don and then at the same time, making it look like the Bible had some kind of supernatural power, that it really did not have, to screw around with the minds of gullible people who did not require scientific explanations for everything. I could easily imagine a demon doing so. If that was what happened, then it means that there really is a demon that did pretend to be Yahweh to screw around with people, just for laughs or for sadistic entertainment.

 

Your alternate explanations are ad hoc. Similar to someone claiming that the reason fossils exist is because God created them in situ 6 thousand years ago. Possible, but I prefer to the go with the evidence.

 

 

 

I honestly have no idea what causes supernatural events, assuming that they actually do.

 

Based on what I know of the Bible, I actually do not consider what it says about God and devils to be the best explanation for supernatural events.

 

Clearly, once you study the phenomenon of possession the Bible is not the only source of information. The entities themselves confirm that Christ is Lord of all.

 

[OrdinaryClay]

OC, your alleged evidence simply isn't up to our standards here.  Because it's so trivially easy for people to imagine up supernatural experiences and entities that seem real (imagined up a few Myself, in fact), I am no longer accepting any testimony as evidence for the supernatural.  I now require objective and testable physical evidence, including (but not limited to) an in-person, physical manifestation by the alleged god or anti-god.

 

Otherwise, dear fellow, I shall be obligated to ask *you* to accept the following report:

 

On the evening of Friday, January 25, 2013, My best friend witnessed a manifestation of the divine powers of Myself, Astreja K. Odinsdóttir (Goddess of the Northern Hemisphere Vernal Equinox, chocolate, punctuation, and Random Equipment Malfunctions).  While in attendance at a local restaurant, I was drying My hands in the washroom.  The dryer suddenly stopped working and would not restart when I put My hands back into the air-blade unit.  My friend tried it; it worked fine for her.  I tried it again; nothing.  She tried it, and again it worked.  I tried it for a third time, and again the unit failed.

 

So why are you not worshipping Me like the Goddess I am?   

Jesus answered him, "It is written, 'YOU SHALL WORSHIP THE LORD YOUR GOD AND SERVE HIM ONLY.'"  (Luk 4:8)

 

"If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."  (Jos 24:15)

 

[OrdinaryClay]

Your time is running out, OC.

"Time and tide wait for no man."

[mymistake]

"Possible, but I prefer to the go with the evidence."

 

So you have come around and realize that there is no God.  Good for you.  I welcome you to atheism.  Nah, I get that you do not comprehend the meaning of the words you toss around.

 

 

"Clearly, once you study the phenomenon of possession the Bible is not the only source of information. The entities themselves confirm that Christ is Lord of all."

 

So you do not prefer to go with the evidence.  You prefer fantasy.