Is Satan being present in many places at once Biblical?

[Jimmy Higgins]

Promoting the faith with violence of course isn't supported by God.

Pretty much the entire Old Testament says you are wrong.

If by your intriguing reading of the OT by ignoring things like the commandments for example, you may have something there. If you should include the NT then it's saying your reading of the OT is wrong.

Exodus through to Deuteronomy is washed in the blood of the alleged conquests of Yahweh's people... at the command of Yahweh. This is indisputable!

 

[Elixir]

As the above. God should be able to see various futures at the same time, if we are to use omniscience as a major attribute.

Omniscience would limit foresight to single future, since only one future is going to occur and an omniscient being would know precisely what it is.

Just another thing that makes the Xtian god concept STUPID.

Exodus through to Deuteronomy is washed in the blood of the alleged conquests of Yahweh's people... at the command of Yahweh. This is indisputable!

And that’s another one.

 

[DBT]

If the outcome is perfectly known, given omniscience, the 'various parallel outcomes' were never in the running. The 'various parallel outcomes' being the perception of a limited mind, a mind that cannot see the pathway that events are going to take.

Omniscience and a limited mind in the same paragraph, ok.
I wasn't saying that ALL the parallel worlds would be played out along side each other in regards of the God of the bible. I was using the analogy of parallel worlds in contrast to omniscience - the ability to know 'alternative endings' to the one only big show. IOW YOU choose how it ends.

God is said to be omniscient, knowing the end from the beginning, as the bible says.

We as humans have no such ability, we do not and cannot know the present because it is too vast, nor can we predict future events perfectly, so our minds are not omniscient, they are limited.

So yes, be it God and human, omniscience and limited mind in the same paragraph.

I wasn't saying that ALL the parallel worlds would be played out along side each other in regards of the God of the bible. I was using the analogy of parallel worlds in contrast to omniscience - the ability to know 'alternative endings' to the one only big show. IOW YOU choose how it ends.

Your decisions are a part of the progression of events. If a particular future plays out, as God knows it will, your decisions must contribute to the progression of events that make that future and that future alone a reality.

You are trying to play it both ways.

 

[Learner]

Promoting the faith with violence of course isn't supported by God.

Pretty much the entire Old Testament says you are wrong.

If by your intriguing reading of the OT by ignoring things like the commandments for example, you may have something there. If you should include the NT then it's saying your reading of the OT is wrong.

Exodus through to Deuteronomy is washed in the blood of the alleged conquests of Yahweh's people... at the command of Yahweh. This is indisputable!

One can read all types of books on atrocious wars in history which is awashed with blood ,- that must be "promoting" violence too according to you lot. The mentioning of 'people at war' in bible isn't promoting violence.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

It is when God commands those genocides.

 

[Learner]

As the above. God should be able to see various futures at the same time, if we are to use omniscience as a major attribute.

Omniscience would limit foresight to single future, since only one future is going to occur and an omniscient being would know precisely what it is.Just another thing that makes the Xtian god concept STUPID

Of course there's one future. Wouldn't an Almighty God outside time be able to see several 'possible' endings in each individual?Limited foresight indeed it is...for the likes of you and me that is.

Why is there a thing called judgement? Why are there rules or laws that people who choose to live under God, must abide by them because they understand there'd be consequences for their actions?
Omniscience and limited in the same sentence, now that sounds stupid.

Exodus through to Deuteronomy is washed in the blood of the alleged conquests of Yahweh's people... at the command of Yahweh. This is indisputable!

And that’s another one.

Do warn those you know who watch LOTR to be aware,as it "promotes" violence. That's another one for atheist argument.

 

[bilby]

Why is there a thing called judgement?

There isn't. No gods have ever or will ever judge anyone.

Why are there rules or laws that people who choose to live under God, must abide by them because they understand there'd be consequences for their actions?

There aren't. No gods have ever caused consequences for anyone, as a result of anything.

Omniscience and limited in the same sentence, now that sounds stupid.

Yes, it really does. You should think carefully about that.

Though I imagine you won't.

I hope you will disappoint me.

 

[Learner]

If the outcome is perfectly known, given omniscience, the 'various parallel outcomes' were never in the running. The 'various parallel outcomes' being the perception of a limited mind, a mind that cannot see the pathway that events are going to take.

Omniscience and a limited mind in the same paragraph, ok.
I wasn't saying that ALL the parallel worlds would be played out along side each other in regards of the God of the bible. I was using the analogy of parallel worlds in contrast to omniscience - the ability to know 'alternative endings' to the one only big show. IOW YOU choose how it ends.

God is said to be omniscient, knowing the end from the beginning, as the bible says.

Yes there is an ultimate destiny for humans. Certain people mentioned in prophecy and the prophets themselves are the only individuals that have fixed destinies. Jonah tried not to involve himself but he had his path chosen for him by God.

We as humans have no such ability, we do not and cannot know the present because it is too vast, nor can we predict future events perfectly, so our minds are not omniscient, they are limited.

Absolutely I agree. So having that limited capacity as humans, would this also apply to an All Knowing God?
It's seems you and the comrades know the answer to God's ability despite you saying we are limited

So yes, be it God and human, omniscience and limited mind in the same paragraph.

I wasn't saying that ALL the parallel worlds would be played out along side each other in regards of the God of the bible. I was using the analogy of parallel worlds in contrast to omniscience - the ability to know 'alternative endings' to the one only big show. IOW YOU choose how it ends.

Your decisions are a part of the progression of events. If a particular future plays out, as God knows it will, your decisions must contribute to the progression of events that make that future and that future alone a reality.

You are trying to play it both ways.

There is judgement what else can I say from a little bit of conceptual deduction?

The bible particularly describes names get rubbed out .... not added to the book of life. A key element here! It implies therefore: ALL names are already in the Book of Life from conception! What happens to the names remaining there or not in the Book of Life is dependent on what each person 'shalt do or not do'.

 

[Learner]

Why is there a thing called judgement?

There isn't. No gods have ever or will ever judge anyone.

Why are there rules or laws that people who choose to live under God, must abide by them because they understand there'd be consequences for their actions?

There aren't. No gods have ever caused consequences for anyone, as a result of anything.

If you can't entertain the idea to debate the concept of the theology "why would a god do such and such", then best switch to "they ain't no god anyway" mode. "yeah that will stump the theist"
I get it bilby, it often happens with some of our forum friends too.

Omniscience and limited in the same sentence, now that sounds stupid.

Yes, it really does. You should think carefully about that.

Though I imagine you won't.

I hope you will disappoint me.

I have thought carefully and you'd be disappointed either way

 

[Elixir]

Wouldn't an Almighty God outside time be able to see several 'possible' endings in each individual?

No. If it sees multiple endings it’s not omniscient. An omniscient super being would know the one outcome. Given that your imaginary friend is also omnipotent. It would surely be able to contemplate whatever it wants, but there would only be one possible future and it would already know what it is.

 

[ideologyhunter]

One can read all types of books on atrocious wars in history which is awashed with blood ,- that must be "promoting" violence too according to you lot. The mentioning of 'people at war' in bible isn't promoting violence.

This is an inadequate response. You're writing as if you don't know that Biblegod ordered genocide. That surely can't be the case; you're good with citing verses to build your case.
We're talking about a god who killed off humanity in the seventh chapter of 'his' book. But let me get to the post-Egypt passages that clearly spell out the connection with God and mass killings.
I. Num. 25:16-7: God commanded Moses,"Attack the Midianites and utterly destroy them." He says this is the lot of the Midianites for seducing the Israelite men into whoredom at Peor.
Numbers 31: The Israelites are led in the attack by Phinehas, who kills all the men of Midian, loots the place, and brings back livestock plus all the women and children. Moses is furious, because they had not followed God's command to the letter. He orders that Phinehas slaughter the children and older women but spare the girls and women who are virgins -- they must be "kept alive for yourselves." (The next heading, in the Good News Bible, is 'Division of the Loot'!!)
II. Deut. 20: 16-17, which is part of a long section where Moses reveals the laws and teachings that God has commissioned him to give to the people: "When you capture the cities in the land that the LORD your God has given you, kill everyone. Completely destroy all the people: the Hittites, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites, as the LORD ordered you to do."
III. Here's Biblegod in action, doing the killing himself. I Chron. 21: Satan convinces David to take a census of Israel, which offends God. God sends a message to David through Gad that he must choose between three consequences: three years of famine, or three months of military defeat, or three days in which God will attack the Israelites "with his sword", killing them with disease. David chooses the third consequence, and God kills SEVENTY THOUSAND of the Israelites. (As a bizarre coda, if you check the account of these events in II Sam. 24, it was God and not Satan who ordered the census.)

Now, I claim that the Bible isn't just "mentioning violence" in these passages. If you think the slaughter of the captives in Numbers 31 is disapproved of by the Bible writers, then you're writing your own Bible. And God killing 70,000 people over a census -- does the writer fault God for this? Do you see why atheists look at these passages (which may all be fictitious) and see a completely immoral spirit running through them? To sum up:
> I wonder if you think Num. 31, Deut. 20, and I Chron. 21 truthfully narrate the commands and actions of God.
> Is genocide ever a justified and moral action?
> Is genocide justified and moral if a god orders it?
> Is it reasonable to believe that there exists a god, written about by a specific group, who favors that group in war and orders it to annhilate its enemies, killing young and old, sick and helpless, infants and children?
> Could such a god reasonably be called a god of love and mercy?
> Would such a god be worthy of worship?
> Again, do you see why nonbelievers look at these texts and can't be persuaded that there's a "good reason" and "justification" for them?
> And once again, did anyone in the NT ever cite these texts and the others like them and call them lies told about God?

 

[Elixir]

did anyone in the NT ever cite these texts and the others like them and call them lies told about God?

Well, I didn’t make it into the NT but I WILL call the entire collection “lies told about God”.
Prove me wrong.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Promoting the faith with violence of course isn't supported by God.

Pretty much the entire Old Testament says you are wrong.

If by your intriguing reading of the OT by ignoring things like the commandments for example, you may have something there. If you should include the NT then it's saying your reading of the OT is wrong.

Exodus through to Deuteronomy is washed in the blood of the alleged conquests of Yahweh's people... at the command of Yahweh. This is indisputable!

One can read all types of books on atrocious wars in history which is awashed with blood ,- that must be "promoting" violence too according to you lot. The mentioning of 'people at war' in bible isn't promoting violence.

You are correct. I misread your post. The Torah doesn't promote faith in Yahweh with violence. They merely murdered men women children and conquered using lots of violence to get land and stuff.

 

[Learner]

Wouldn't an Almighty God outside time be able to see several 'possible' endings in each individual?

No. If it sees multiple endings it’s not omniscient. An omniscient super being would know the one outcome. Given that your imaginary friend is also omnipotent. It would surely be able to contemplate whatever it wants, but there would only be one possible future and it would already know what it is.

There IS one future yes, that's written as a given, but not necessarily for many individuals. The thing called 'judgement' wouldn't be necessary otherwise.

This is a theology emphasised on free will. God 'need only see the end outcome' of what you and I have done through our lives for the whole idea of judgement as I've said, and repentance to work.

 

[bilby]

There IS one future yes, that's written as a given, but not necessarily for many individuals.

That's a contradiction, and insane.

The thing called 'judgement' wouldn't be necessary otherwise.

Ah. Yes. Your religion has contradiction as a feature, rather than as a bug; It's a test to ensure that you put loyalty above reason.

If you refuse to accept the insane contradictions demanded by your religion, then you are 'judged' as unworthy.

Only mindless sycophancy is acceptable.

 

[Learner]

There IS one future yes, that's written as a given, but not necessarily for many individuals.

That's a contradiction, and insane.

Judgement and free will contradicts your notion.

The thing called 'judgement' wouldn't be necessary otherwise.

Ah. Yes. Your religion has contradiction as a feature, rather than as a bug; It's a test to ensure that you put loyalty above reason.

Or... reason applied to the atheists reasoning when they're interpreting biblical texts... reveals that even atheist out-of-context errors sounds like a good argument.

If you refuse to accept the insane contradictions demanded by your religion, then you are 'judged' as unworthy.

Only mindless sycophancy is acceptable.

As the above.

 

[Elixir]

There IS one future yes, that's written as a given, but not necessarily for many individuals.

^ is that what passes for making sense in your bizarro world?

Yes there is ONE future. For everyone.

The thing called 'judgement' wouldn't be necessary otherwise.

There is no such thing, but if there was it would have no bearing on the fact that there is only one future and an omniscient super being would know what it is - judgments and all.

Weaving idiotic suppositions from the gossamer cloth of your inability to understand reality, is a tragic exercise that looks nothing but pitiful from outside your bubble.

Perhaps you need to look up the meaning of “omniscient”, Learner. It doesn’t mean “knows everything except stuff that hasn’t been decided yet, and judgments that have yet to be rendered”.