-Bruh- wrote

I'm gonna step on in here and speak for my main man and my lord and savior lucifer, But In church, Don't they say that Heaven is a place so far in the sky that it is theoretically impossible to ever get a glimpse at it.? They also say hell is below us, So hell is either in the center of the Earth or somewhere in China. So I guess technically you could say we are closer to Hell, and hell has Lucifer. Let's face it, i'm gonna end up there with all my friends because being good is no fun.

Sounds like troll, but maybe not, so...

Heaven and Hell aren't regarded as places that exist in reality.
There isn't meant to be some physical place out there in space where everything is perfect.
And Lucifer was thrown 'past' Earth, by God. So Hell wouldn't be on Earth if it was a place which existed in reality.

Assuming these things weren't fictional characters created by man, yes, we'd be considered closer to satan than we would a god.
The whole Adam & Eve story sorta set the groundwork for that.

If we followed the exact rules the bible sets, we'd 100% be sinning more often than we aren't.

ManWithNoName wrote

-Bruh- wrote

I'm gonna step on in here and speak for my main man and my lord and savior lucifer, But In church, Don't they say that Heaven is a place so far in the sky that it is theoretically impossible to ever get a glimpse at it.? They also say hell is below us, So hell is either in the center of the Earth or somewhere in China. So I guess technically you could say we are closer to Hell, and hell has Lucifer. Let's face it, i'm gonna end up there with all my friends because being good is no fun.

Sounds like troll, but maybe not, so...

Heaven and Hell aren't regarded as places that exist in reality.
There isn't meant to be some physical place out there in space where everything is perfect.
And Lucifer was thrown 'past' Earth, by God. So Hell wouldn't be on Earth if it was a place which existed in reality.

But, in the Bible and in every church service i've ever attended, They always claimed Hell was under us and always claimed there was a all white glorious place called Heaven somewhere in the sky with angels flying around. No, I'm Not religious as I believe in science, But Christianity still tickles my brain sometimes.
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ] This does give some pointers about the topic at hand though.

Lavish wrote Assuming these things weren't fictional characters created by man, yes, we'd be considered closer to satan than we would a god.
The whole Adam & Eve story sorta set the groundwork for that.

If we followed the exact rules the bible sets, we'd 100% be sinning more often than we aren't.

There are plenty of reasons why I don't follow religion, They are all corrupt. I MEAN HAVE YOU READ DEAUTERONOMY 22:28-29?!?!?

fknvlink wrote

ManWithNoName wrote

Click to View Content

fknvlink wrote

ManWithNoName wrote

Royales wrote No, you misinterpreted this I meant that we by nature are more sinful and malicious rather than nice as we cause arguments say hateful things etc.

Where did I not address that very question?

The problem with saying that humans are more like Satan, which is basically just saying that humans are more bad than good, is that it's a blanket statement.
There's no quantifiable data which can be used to prove that claim, and any theory which is based on an assumption like that isn't a very good one in my opinion.

But let's say you're right, there is more bad in the world than there is good.
Does that mean that people are more bad than good? That depends on whether or not there are an equal amount of opportunities.

So I think that while there is more bad in the world than good, I don't believe that it's because people are more bad than good.

Prograf wrote LOL when did i ever say that atheists are devil worshipers lol you totally misinterpreted what i said when i said that we may actually be the decedent of the devil I did not want you to think I was a devil worshiper so I said I was not a devil worshiper i believe in god, don't put word in my mouth.

Fair enough.
'I'm not a devil worshipper, I believe in God...' implies that those who don't believe are devil worshippers.
But if that's not what you meant then that's fine.
Just as I assume you aren't trying to say we're all the 'deceased of Satan' but rather that we are the 'descendants of Satan.'

Besides, even if you were a devil worshipper it would have no bearing on the topic.

Bro, you need to calm down. His statement didn't imply anything like what you thought it did. If it implied anything it was that people who think we come from Satan would usually be satanists. He never said anything about non believers.

From the rest of your reply seems like you would do well in some atheism circle jerk forum.

fknvlink wrote Bro, you need to calm down. His statement didn't imply anything like what you thought it did.

I know. Which is why I said: "But if that's not what you meant then that's fine."
If you're going to attack me rather than my arguments or positions then there's really no point in replying.

Also, what I said in this post is quite moderate. I didn't bash religion or say that it's all a bunch of nonsense.
If it's gotten to the point where arguments like that can be brushed to the side as 'Just more atheist rhetoric' then I don't see why you would get involved in a debate like this.

Your massive reply just made something rather simple needlessly complex and you were just nitpicking and being pretentious. Bad isn't arbitrary. The example you gave was making it subjective or relative. And generally speaking when someone is stealing or killing they knows its bad, the majority don't think its was right. They might think they HAD to do it but still.

How many opportunities do you get to do good things?
You might see someone stood in front of you in the queue at the supermarket who is running short on change, you give them money and that's your good deed.
On the other hand, you could pull out a gun and shoot every single person in the queue.
That's 5 bad things for every 1 good thing you could do

What kind of example is this? You are comparing a minor to an extreme. A better one would be "a woman dropped a $5 bill and didn't realize. You could either give it to her(good), leave it(neutral, debatably bad) or take it for yourself(bad). Not, a woman dropped a $5 bill and didn't realize, so you shot her dead.

it's a blanket statement

Yea, that was the point. Its a generalization. Its meant to be a blanket statement. You said it as if blanket statements are inherently bad

There's no quantifiable data which can be used to prove that claim, and any theory which is based on an assumption like that isn't a very good one in my opinion.

like c'mon man, this is just cheese. this doesn't mean anything in this discussion. Like it was just an observation. Its not claiming anything more than that. Its really just a philosophical theory. I mean, I personally wouldn't call it a theory since it is philosophical but that is a whole other thing entirely. Like I said you are just making something needlessly complex.

Your massive reply just made something rather simple needlessly complex and you were just nitpicking and being pretentious. Bad isn't arbitrary. The example you gave was making it subjective or relative. And generally speaking when someone is stealing or killing they knows its bad, the majority don't think its was right. They might think they HAD to do it but still.

God forbid someone go into some nuance in a post on TTG.

'Bad' is arbitrary. 'Bad' and 'Good' as concrete things which exist only exist in the world of divine command ethics.
We could both use terms like 'generally' and disagree until the cows come home because there are no statistics on something like that.

What kind of example is this? You are comparing a minor to an extreme. A better one would be "a woman dropped a $5 bill and didn't realize. You could either give it to her(good), leave it(neutral, debatably bad) or take it for yourself(bad). Not, a woman dropped a $5 bill and didn't realize, so you shot her dead.

You obviously missed the point.
My point wasn't to compare how good or bad an action is, but how many opportunities people have to do good or bad things.

Yea, that was the point. Its a generalization. Its meant to be a blanket statement. You said it as if blanket statements are inherently bad.

Blanket statements make furthering a discussion impossible.
'Humans are more bad than good based on no evidence at all'
'Well I say humans are more good than bad based on no evidence at all'
-end of conversation-

like c'mon man, this is just cheese. this doesn't mean anything in this discussion. Like it was just an observation. Its not claiming anything more than that. Its really just a philosophical theory. I mean, I personally wouldn't call it a theory since it is philosophical but that is a whole other thing entirely. Like I said you are just making something needlessly complex.

An observation which he followed to make a conclusion. That's a hypothesis, perhaps it's a better word than theory.
Philosophy isn't just, 'what if we're not really real... dewd...' it has a basis in science and should include evidence wherever possible.

If you can't disagree with this topic because he's made a blanket statement which cannot be proven or disproven then you have to disagree with the method by which he reached his conclusion.

Making generalized statements are easy to do, I did it in my first post on this topic, so I'm not blaming him for doing it, but I think they should be argued against where they are found.

---

---

You guys need to calm down, also I am trying to say that we ourselves are more obedient to sinful or negative behavior regardless of the distance to God or Lucifer.