Do God and Satan Exist?

Some say yes, some say no. Lets discuss this. I will give my LONG belief below, which i posted at another forum, but i feel you all here will get more out of it.

God and Satan, are they real, are they fake? No man or woman can truly say beyond a doubt they are until they die, or can they?

I am a Roman Catholic, aka a Christian. Part of the original Church in which Jesus set up, Not believe in Chirst is a completely seperate issue, but i felt before I go into a long detailed explanation, you should know a bit of my own religion.

Now do God and Satan exist. THe fact is, they do. You can choose not to believe in them, as that is your right. God could make hte world all goodie goodie, but he wants his creations to OPENLY accept him, not forcibly.

Now, how do I know they do? First things first, SOMETHING had to create everything. Nothing ever jsut was. Now that raises the question then, WHO created God. No one can answer that, and we just say he always was. I suppose if he always was, theni guess certain matter in the "big bang" theory could of just always been... but thats matter. Matter is always disposable, and can break down over time. So how can it always be if it gets less and less over time? God is different. Look at the Bible, where the basis of believing GOD comes from. None of the bible has been proven false by historians, and actually, much of each testment, old and new, have been proven as some sort of fact. Take moses and the freeing of slaves out of egypt. Historians have proved that egypt has almsot alwasy had slaves, but at one point a long time ago, hebrews were suddenly FREED from egypt. Now no name of the man who caused them to be freed was ever given in a historical document outside of bible, BUT other docuements have confired a mix of incidents that lead to the release of the slaves, in specific 7 incidences, which ironically coincides with the bible, only the bible goes into a bit more detail.

Now, the whole 40 days and nights, 10 commandments, and all that stuff cannot be exactly PROVEN to have happened, yet many a war have been faught OVER the ORIGINAL 10 commandments, that as of now, have been gone for centuries and no one knows where they are. Now, if the commandments didn't exist, why did people suddenly FIGHT over them? Grant it he could of written them himself... this moses guy, but come on. & incidences and the writing on 2 giant stone tablets, seems highly unlikely one man can do this without some superior help. or "magic" if you will.

When we think of magic, we think of illusion. SUre there are fantasy novels explaining magic, but we all know that as humans, we can't do anything of the sort. Magic that we do is all fake, and merely tricks of the eye and the slight of you will. I don't think the 7 incidents STRONG enough to convince a Pharoh to let all his slaves go free could be a mere ILLUSION.

This is just one example of something in the bible that can't be proved wrong. There are some stories, like Adam and Eve, that can never be proved, an many believe them to be false. I too beleive it's false, and merely another one of God's parables to help us better understand him. So does god exist? Too many things have happened in history that either A, coincide WITH the bibles stories, just not as detailed in other docuements, or B: Miracles happen all the time. There will always be stuff that happens that is Unexplainable. Tell me how someone who is lieing sick in there death bed with Cancer that can't be operated on, and almsot EVERY bodily function has ceased, can wake up the next morning as if nothing was ever wrong and be 100% healthy. It's mathmatically as well as medically IMPOSSIBLE for this to happen, yet it has, on MORE then one occasion. Blind suddenly able to see, deaf beign able hear, allt hese thing that are IMPOSSIBLE according to science and doctors, they DO happen. What other being could possibly do this then someone that has the powers of what people call "God".

As for satan, naturally there has to be a temptation. If you believe in God, then you believe in Free Will, wich we all do have. Now, if there was NEVER a satan, or the oposition to God, we wouldn't know anything BUT God, and free will would be pointless, as there would be only Good. Sure we can make bad choices, but they say that you only did something wrong and sinful, if you knew at the time it was wrong. Without a temptation or some evil, how can there even be a WRONG. Sure it is wrong to beat our wifes and children, but may not even know what that means or is if something never tempted people to be angry enough to strike another person.

By all means, Satan cannot have power over God, as In the end, it's your faith that can save you. Satan has lost every battle. He tried to overthrow God, and he was defeated and sent to his own realm.

Then there are Exorcisms, which to me, prove the exist of Demons. I just saw the movie "the Exorcism of Emily Rose". The movie is BASED OFF A TRUE STORY. This means all the events, or 90% of them, happened in some way or shape like the movie presents it. Now I don't know about you, but our eyes can't NATURALLY changed colors, we can't Speak in Different tongues perfectly in a different type of voice (the tape of the excrocism in the movie turned out to be the ORIGINAL tape from the actual court case, and holy crap, that is some scary stuff.)

So obviously, Satan exists. God has power over Satan as even with possesion of a human, God alone can disspell them. Sure it is a battle, and if the person ever gives in they cannot be saved, but as Emily's letter stated, her purpose in her life was to open up everyone's eyes that there is a battle, a struggle, beyond what we understand and that there are the forces of God and Satan around us, whether we WANT to believe it's there or not.

You can say what you want to disprove any of this, really you can. It wont change my mind. THere is too much that no one can explain in this world, such as possesion (even with all the excuses in the court case, each one was shot down because of something that did not coincide with Emily's condition at all), and litttle miracles, that it is down right crazy to not believe something else exists that is more powerful then we can imagine.

Debate on Jesus can be saved for a later time, but i can say that he has been proven through records to actually exist, and his beatings were recorded, as well as a few miracles mentioned in other documents. You must remember, the other docuements dismissed his miracles as the work of the devil, thus proving he wasn't the son of God, yet why would the devil do things liek raise people from the dead and cure the sick?

I will leave you all to ponder what i said, and for most finds ways to refute it. I can't wait to see responses.

Originally Posted by Legend

None of the bible has been proven false by historians, and actually, much of each testment, old and new, have been proven as some sort of fact. Take moses and the freeing of slaves out of egypt. Historians have proved that egypt has almsot alwasy had slaves, but at one point a long time ago, hebrews were suddenly FREED from egypt. Now no name of the man who caused them to be freed was ever given in a historical document outside of bible, BUT other docuements have confired a mix of incidents that lead to the release of the slaves, in specific 7 incidences, which ironically coincides with the bible, only the bible goes into a bit more detail.

I was under the impression that it was always challenged with history, especially the global flood. And, the Egyptians were very good at not recording the bad sides of their history. I'm not sure where you get these documents showing 7 different releases, or how they coincide with the Bible (Please capitalize, it's the name of a book [/GrammarNazi]) so, would you please give us your sources on this?

Originally Posted by Legend

Now, the whole 40 days and nights, 10 commandments, and all that stuff cannot be exactly PROVEN to have happened, yet many a war have been faught OVER the ORIGINAL 10 commandments, that as of now, have been gone for centuries and no one knows where they are. Now, if the commandments didn't exist, why did people suddenly FIGHT over them? Grant it he could of written them himself... this moses guy, but come on. & incidences and the writing on 2 giant stone tablets, seems highly unlikely one man can do this without some superior help. or "magic" if you will.

Wars happen all the time in the old days for any old reason. I wasn't aware the only reason for them back then was the Ten Commandments. Where did you get this info?

Originally Posted by Legend

When we think of magic, we think of illusion. SUre there are fantasy novels explaining magic, but we all know that as humans, we can't do anything of the sort. Magic that we do is all fake, and merely tricks of the eye and the slight of you will. I don't think the 7 incidents STRONG enough to convince a Pharoh to let all his slaves go free could be a mere ILLUSION.

But then, was it ever proven in documentation outside of the biblical texts to show that magic or miracles were the key factor in releasing the slaves? Anything could've happened to make him do so.

Originally Posted by Legend

There will always be stuff that happens that is Unexplainable. Tell me how someone who is lieing sick in there death bed with Cancer that can't be operated on, and almsot EVERY bodily function has ceased, can wake up the next morning as if nothing was ever wrong and be 100% healthy. It's mathmatically as well as medically IMPOSSIBLE for this to happen, yet it has, on MORE then one occasion. Blind suddenly able to see, deaf beign able hear, allt hese thing that are IMPOSSIBLE according to science and doctors, they DO happen. What other being could possibly do this then someone that has the powers of what people call "God".

This is termed 'supernatural.' Science hasn't explained it because its very nature lies beyond point of experimentation or factual reasoning, like an unprovable theory.

Originally Posted by Legend

Then there are Exorcisms, which to me, prove the exist of Demons. I just saw the movie "the Exorcism of Emily Rose". The movie is BASED OFF A TRUE STORY. This means all the events, or 90% of them, happened in some way or shape like the movie presents it. Now I don't know about you, but our eyes can't NATURALLY changed colors, we can't Speak in Different tongues perfectly in a different type of voice (the tape of the excrocism in the movie turned out to be the ORIGINAL tape from the actual court case, and holy crap, that is some scary stuff.)

I don't know about you, but I'm very good at speaking in different languages in different dialects and ranges.
But, based off a true story isn't such a good backing. It can be anywhere between 5% to 90% accurate you see. Plus, there's no other proof of it actually happening like the movie except for an eyewitness account from a closed group. There's always the chance it was staged or tricked into their heads. That, and the voice recording, which can be easily faked. Hollywood does it all the time to make their own horror films.

Originally Posted by Legend

Debate on Jesus can be saved for a later time, but i can say that he has been proven through records to actually exist, and his beatings were recorded, as well as a few miracles mentioned in other documents. You must remember, the other docuements dismissed his miracles as the work of the devil, thus proving he wasn't the son of God, yet why would the devil do things liek raise people from the dead and cure the sick?

Well, the AntiChrist/Dajjal is supposed to do the same. And he isn't God or the son by a long shot.

The only mention of Jesus in any historical text written prior to the Fifth Century is a single passage, barely a footnote, in a history of the region about the time Jesus lived, written circa 90 AD. This passage is:

Quote:
"Now there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works - a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named after him, are not extinct at this day."


The supposed author, Josephus Flavius, was an Orthodox Jew, who in the words of a contemporary "did not believe in Jesus as the Christ." So the authenticity is very questionable as it might have been forged later on.

Contrary to popular belief the Roman governate at Jerusalem and Galilee were horrible at their duties, including keeping records.

I was WAITING For someone to RIP apart my stuff, it's about time.

Ok, time to reply.

The Bible never challenged history. See Events in the bible may not be as described. A world wide flood may have just been a major flood over the whole region, or for the person such as Noah, his own Known world, not the actualy world itself. Plus, that story is more believed to be jsut that, a story fro teaching. See everything in the bible isn't meant as something that really happened, andthats where many peopel say the bible is crap because of the stories.

I never said wars only happened for the 10 commandments, i am merely stating that there WERE wars over them. It doesn't prove there existance, but there were fighting over SOMETHING. Unfortunatly, i am not sure, but I \believe it was destroyed in some battle, but i don't remember exactly.

True, ANYTHING could of happened to make a pharoh release the slaves... but what? When you think about it, egypt was ran by slaves, and they had to do everything, so it has to be something bad enough, like his son dieing, to convince him to let them go. besides, someone had to demand them to be let go for him to even have it on his mind that they are the cause of anything.

As for supernatural, it's just another way for them to say they can't explain it and don't understand why it happens. I jsut choose to believe it happened because God wanted it too. Hence it explains it perfectly well for me.

I don't have time to reply to the rest, but i will do so eventually.

Originally Posted by Virtigo

The only mention of Jesus in any historical text written prior to the Fifth Century is a single passage, barely a footnote, in a history of the region about the time Jesus lived, written circa 90 AD. This passage is:

Not exactly. Tacitus, a Roman historian writing in the second century AD (early second century), mentioned Jesus (in his Annals).

Christ and the Christians are mentioned in the account of how Nero went after Christians to divert attention from the fire of Rome (which occured in 64AD). (Frustratingly, Tacitus's work covering the period of 29-32 is mostly lost, so whether he wrote of the trial of Jesus we can't know.) Tacitus is a highly reliable source. He not only was opposed to the Christians, he was in his own rights a highly skeptical historian.

But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.

Quote:
"Now there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works - a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named after him, are not extinct at this day."


The supposed author, Josephus Flavius, was an Orthodox Jew, who in the words of a contemporary "did not believe in Jesus as the Christ." So the authenticity is very questionable as it might have been forged later on.

The body of the quote is accurate. Certain interpolations are obvious. "if it be lawful to call him a man," obviously so because Josephus was an Orthodox Jew. Well, I'll deal with another passage of his:

Antiquities 20.9.1 But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.

This one seems like a pretty good one to start with. There is nothing that contrasts with Josephus's beliefs as a Jew. He calls Jesus the "so-called Christ," that is to say, others attribute it to him (but he's just relaying the message, not claiming so himself.) In fact, I'd even detect a slight sarcasm in the 'so-called' bit. Plus, "brother of Jesus" isn't generally a Christian term, and early Christians used terms like "brother of the Savior" or Brother of the Lord." I know, you're saying, the Christian interpolation couldn't have been that stupid! But the interpolation in the last one we saw was very stupid, so I don't think that applies. That the piety of the interpolaters exceeded their sense is apparent.

Anyway, back to the other one:

Antiquities 18.3.3 Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day.

The bold is somewhat transparently interpolations. Remove the interpolations, and you still have a reference to Jesus. I think the partial interpolation is the most sane conclusion. I don't think all of it is created, out of whole cloth, but I certainly don't believe that Josephus attributed the bold to Jesus. The italicized portion is maybe yes/maybe no. The translation for that might be a bit wrong, and it might instead of being "wonderful" be "strange" or "surprising," and that certainly would mitigate the tone of the phrase. In any case, that one isn't clear cut.

So, that's three references. Josephus and Tacitus are both considered highly reliable. There is also a small handful of more references. From Pliny (Pliny mentions the Christians worshipping Christ "as God,"), from Thallus (Julius Africanus writing later disputes the historian Thallus' account that the darkness at Jesus' crucifixion was an eclipse [because he believes it was a miracle]) and Lucian. And then some lesser, and less reliable references (like Suetonius). (Not all of these are "historical" texts, but they are secular [that is, non-Christian] sources.)

Any way it goes, a very interesting subject.

-Rob

EDIT:

Hrm. On a second rereading of this topic, I'm getting some bad vibes about it. I'll let it stay open, but be calm and clear.

bad vibes? I think so far the conversation has gone quite well. We have strayed a bit now talking about the existence of jesus. which I suppose is my own fault as I did put my last remark in my opening statement about it.

I'll change the title and throw Jesus in there too.

Anyways, as you can see virtigo, There are several other sources, but the reliable and credible ones have already been mentioned, and most are by non-christians. Articles by christians themselves cannot be trusted in proving the existence of God, Jesus, and the Devil as obviosuly they may say wnat they want to make people believe what they believe. This is turning into an intersting topic, I just hope we can remain calm and realize we are merely discussing, not arguing.

I try to stay away from this area of the fourms, I usually don't post my thoughts but I'll say something just this once.

I don't believe in either because I frankly don't care. I'm not going to waist my time on things like that. If there is a god or not, I'm still going to get up everymorning, eat breakfest ect. Lifes going to be the same damn thing it is everyday. Honlestly, who cares?

bible, bible, bible, bible, bible.

God and Satan were made up to keep people inline, then over time it just spread. Now we have Police to keep things inline, though hey do follow the bible.

So no.

-------------------------------------------------------Disclaimer----------------------------------------------------
This is the sole opion on Ninboy and should not be taken with any offence.

I have to agree with the one that adopted me and my good friend Lord Yoshi. His opinion is the same as mine life goes on and honestly why ponder on is he there. Or is he not? Just think of the fact and wonder but who can give a flying care in the world. I guess you can say Yes I believe in christiananity but know I dont care about does god and satan exist.

Originally Posted by Bobslob

"Tacitus Reference"

Good, good! I was hoping this board had a few intellectuals lurking about.

I was by no means discrediting his existance. The entirety of my post is to instill some research and thinking. Normally, people today take things for granted on nothing more than hearsay, so they become fodder in real debates - especially for athiests.

Legend, I don't disagree with you on anything (well, except Jesus being the son of God of course), but to get you, and many others, to dive deeper than that into history. Take note of how Bobslob pulled this off with ample sourcing. Just saying 'He lived because the Romans said so' doesn't cut it with the critical. Mentioning Josephus, or Tacitus, or Tertullian and then quoting, is better.

I personally think that god nor satan exist. thinking that a powerful being beyond earth is living is just absurd. I'm also not going to go against christianity. Every person has his or hers own religion, I beleive in your actions spell your own fate and that's how i'm going to be for a while.

Ack... sorry to say Legend, but I do not think that too many of your arguments are too strong. I agree with the vast majority of them, however I do not think that you word them as I would, or bring up the most credible examples. I have to go to work really soon so unfortunately I can't write too much, but briefly...

This is just one example of something in the bible that can't be proved wrong. There are some stories, like Adam and Eve, that can never be proved, an many believe them to be false. I too beleive it's false, and merely another one of God's parables to help us better understand him.

As far as I'm aware, every verifiable claim in the Bible is true. Oh, and why don't you believe the history of Adam & Eve? I've often been puzzled by this - how people do not think that the Genesis account is factual. I mean, its basically fundemental to the Bible. Why do we have sin at all? Why is Jesus named the "last Adam"? Why is there death & suffering? If the Genesis account is not true then the whole Bible is nonsensical. For example, why do you think that all of those genealogies (sp) are in the Bible? (e.g so-and-so begat so-and-so who begat so-and-so) They are there so we can trace are roots from Jesus along the lineage back to Adam. You're suggesting that Jesus is little more than a descendant of a parable; a descendant of a metaphor and that we too are just descendants of a metaphor. That just doesn't really make sense to me, sorry ^_~ I just can't see where there is suggestion that the Genesis account should be taken as a parable, and I'd like to see more elaboration on this point.

This is termed 'supernatural.' Science hasn't explained it because its very nature lies beyond point of experimentation or factual reasoning, like an unprovable theory.

Yeah... I kinda agree here. I do not doubt the authenticity of the miracles that are performed daily, however it all really depends on what 'glasses' you have on to look at the incident; what your presuppotions are. According to science, 'just because we can't explain it does not mean that we can automatically attribute it to a higher power/a God', whereas Christians believe that you can attribute it to a God instead of just deeming it 'unexplainable'.

Expect more later~

I appreciate that you put effort in the thread, Legend, but the reason why I believe that God and Satan don't exist is because of the lack of proof. What proof is there that proves that God and Satan are real? You can say that miracles are proof but every miracle I have seen can be explained with a scientific reason that uses proof and logic. And if it can't be explained then there is still no proof that it was a work of God.

Also how can you prove that it was the Christian god who created everything? If there is a intelligent designer then how do you know it's Jehovah the god that Christians proclaim to be the true god? And the Christian god goes against his own words (if there really his words). He first says to ask him and you shall recieve. Then he says later that it has to be in his will to actually be done. See the contridiction?

And another contridiction is that God tells people to not make yourself have a big ego. But then he expects people to worship him. That means that God is very egotistic. Let's say that God is real and he wants people to worship him, and there is people who refuse to worship him. What would God do:

a. Send all of them to Hell to burn for eternity.

b. Accept their way and let them go on their own agenda.

If you said a then you're right. God is so egotistic that he opposes all who refuse to worship him and he sends them to eternal torment.

If there is a god/deity then it sure as hell wouldn't be the one that Christians portray as.

Note: Sorry if this was offensive but it's my opinion.

in countries where there is a predominant beleif in hell, the average income is greater.

I am not saying anything, but people who beleive in hell and satan generally beleive in God...




=======================

Originally Posted by Lord Ganon

I appreciate that you put effort in the thread, Legend, but the reason why I believe that God and