Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

Satan was likely a philosopher.

Stupidape
Posts: 171
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2016 8:24:15 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
I was thinking Satan = science. Well, philosophy and science are closely linked. I think Satan was simply an early philosopher. Like Plato, completely human no magical powers or anything. I think he was despised, which is clearly indicated in the Bible.

The reason Satan was likely despised is because he asked questions. He didn't obey unquestionably. I think he existed because many of the Bible stories are based at least part on truth and reality.

Like many other philosophers he was hated and killed by a religious group. I think he should be viewed as a human philosopher and should be mourned as a scientific martyr. Any thoughts?
keithprosser
Posts: 2,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2016 9:35:34 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
I don't think the Hebrews came into contact with the Greeks early enough to explain the OT references to an adversary of God as reaction to Greek philosophy. But the Persians who rescued the Jews from the Babylonian exile in the 6th century BCE were Zoroastrians, and Zoroastrianism is an explicitly dualistic religion, with Ahura Mazda as the 'wise lord' being opposed by 'Ahriman', the personification of chaos.

I'd guess that Satan is an imitation of Ahriman.
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,205
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2016 12:38:53 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
As Jesus would have seen it, the Satan was a helper of g-d who helped him by being a stumbling block to his people in accepting good, over evil. The Satan was not evil himself. He was just a hindering to doing the right thing.
Science can be a hindrance to people of faith.
It seems to offer the easy answers to life's questions, unlike Philosophy, which provides the difficult answers.
"Believe in me, and I will give you everything you could possibly want." - sound familiar?
If Science could be personified..........

Philosopher? Well. Scientists were first called 'Nautral philosophers', and I can see that fitting.
Truthfully, Satan was a scientist, which of course does not mean scientists are Satan, unless they claim g-d is not needed, since we have Science.
Science is no replacement for g-d, except for a few misguided souls.
But I could see Satan making that claim.

So, the common ground I have with the OP is, Satan was likely a natural philosopher (aka scientist), in some of his forms.
In other forms he would be an agent of capitalism, or politician, or even a preacher.
That keeps with the Jewish tradition.
Silly_Billy
Posts: 655
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2016 4:59:50 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/25/2016 8:24:15 AM, Stupidape wrote:
I was thinking Satan = science. Well, philosophy and science are closely linked. I think Satan was simply an early philosopher. Like Plato, completely human no magical powers or anything. I think he was despised, which is clearly indicated in the Bible.

The reason Satan was likely despised is because he asked questions. He didn't obey unquestionably. I think he existed because many of the Bible stories are based at least part on truth and reality.

Like many other philosophers he was hated and killed by a religious group. I think he should be viewed as a human philosopher and should be mourned as a scientific martyr. Any thoughts?

I don't think that Satan was ever about science, it is simply that religion is against change as religion was that what was in power and found itself with less and less power the more things changed. Therefor everything that causes change was ascribed to being the work of Satan.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2016 7:38:23 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
The serpent in the Eden story isn't Satan - that association is made much later than the time it was written. For much of their history the Hebrews/Jews believed in the existence of many gods, of which YHWH was distinguished on the basis he was the 'patron' god of their tribe, as Marduk was the patron god of Babylon.

With multiple gods, there was no need for a Satan figure so in the OT we hear of 'foreign gods' such a Baal and Moloch. Satan makes an appearance when the Jews move more towards monotheism where he serves to provide narrative symmetry.

I think the thesis of the OP doesn't really work.
Hiu
Posts: 1,015
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2016 11:32:51 PM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/25/2016 8:24:15 AM, Stupidape wrote:
I was thinking Satan = science. Well, philosophy and science are closely linked. I think Satan was simply an early philosopher. Like Plato, completely human no magical powers or anything. I think he was despised, which is clearly indicated in the Bible.

The reason Satan was likely despised is because he asked questions. He didn't obey unquestionably. I think he existed because many of the Bible stories are based at least part on truth and reality.

Like many other philosophers he was hated and killed by a religious group. I think he should be viewed as a human philosopher and should be mourned as a scientific martyr. Any thoughts?

Actually a better analogy would be that Satan is more like a prosecutor because Satan in Hebrew means "enemy" or "adversary." If you look at Satan's role in the Bible he makes several attempts to deceive mankind through false promises, prophets, visions etc. In Islamic, Judaic, and Christian philosophy through the eschatology between them, Satan's role is simply to show God that mankind is unworthy of his grace. The following verse comes to mind:

Job 1:10

"Then Satan answered the LORD, "Does Job fear God for nothing? 10"Have You not made a hedge about him and his house and all that he has, on every side? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions have increased in the land. 11"But put forth Your hand now and touch all that he has; he will surely curse You to Your face.""
Perussi
Posts: 782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2016 1:36:35 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/25/2016 8:24:15 AM, Stupidape wrote:
I was thinking Satan = science. Well, philosophy and science are closely linked. I think Satan was simply an early philosopher. Like Plato, completely human no magical powers or anything. I think he was despised, which is clearly indicated in the Bible.

The reason Satan was likely despised is because he asked questions. He didn't obey unquestionably. I think he existed because many of the Bible stories are based at least part on truth and reality.

Like many other philosophers he was hated and killed by a religious group. I think he should be viewed as a human philosopher and should be mourned as a scientific martyr. Any thoughts?

He didn't ask, he demandd and confronted.
Forum Record: 6/0

Funny Quotes:

"i worship satan and allahu akbar and hispanic muslims i am an illigal immigrant"
-communist_snake-

"What fuking dates are you talking about child. the and ridiculous and stay out of mummies drugs, you're fuked."
-I'll keep this anonymous...-

"fuk off bog, no one even reads your crap, what price is you hooker now?"
-same dude as above....-
skipsaweirdo
Posts: 1,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2016 8:42:29 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
At 10/25/2016 9:35:34 AM, keithprosser wrote:
I don't think the Hebrews came into contact with the Greeks early enough to explain the OT references to an adversary of God as reaction to Greek philosophy. But the Persians who rescued the Jews from the Babylonian exile in the 6th century BCE were Zoroastrians, and Zoroastrianism is an explicitly dualistic religion, with Ahura Mazda as the 'wise lord' being opposed by 'Ahriman', the personification of chaos.

I'd guess that Satan is an imitation of Ahriman.
You would be wrong unless you have proof of chain of custody as it were. Do you have direct evidence that any Hebrew wrote about Satan simply as a recording of something they already believed? Since there isn't any physical evidence that has ever been discovered to where a biblical author claimed inspiration from an existing story this is clearly confusing cause and effect fallacy. It reminds me of people who think Sargon was an influence on the story of Moses. River societies had a tradition of putting infants in baskets and putting them in rivers. In this case the physical evidence of the writing suggests , if anything, that the parallels were added to the story of Sargon. The earliest physical evidence of when the stories were written are clearly in favor of Moses as he has written tablets that are dated 300 years earlier than anything mentioning Sargons' river story. Yet because Sargon existed before Moses everyone ignores this little bit of information when stories need to be claimed as plagiarized.
Unless you can prove what's in the mind of someone else similarities are irrelevant.
keithprosser
Posts: 2,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2016 11:53:01 AM
Posted: 1 month ago
I'd concede that without proof I could be wrong, but not that I am definitely wrong.
You make a fair point that it is perfectly possible for the Hebrews to come up with their own dualistic counterart to god - it's not a difficult concept. But I think the Jews changed their religious practices quite radically as a result of the Babylonin exile so 'borrowing' Ahriman from the Persians around that time is not too unreasonable.

I am not aware of any very early documetary evidence for Moses, paticularly evidence of the 'Babe in the bullrushes' episode. If the earliest documentary evidence for that is Exodus then it may not date to much before the 6th century BCE which is when the Bible was compiled, ie after the date of the Sargon tablet.

I have no doubt there was a lot of 'borrowing' going on between story tellers in the ancient world, but I'd agree that some ideas - such as good god/bad god dualism - probably arose many times independently.
PureX
Posts: 1,530
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/21/2016 3:13:43 PM
Posted: 2 weeks ago
The term "satan" refers to a multiplex of literary characters that have been used throughout human history to express and embody socially an self-destructive inclinations within ourselves and each other. The character of "satan" is often used to present us with some moral or ethical dilemma, or lesson, pitting selfish desires against their actual outcomes.

"Satan" is a philosophical caracter in that ethics is a sub-category of philosophical thought and investigation, and "satan" is most often used to express and explore our ethical perspective.
Geogeer
Posts: 4,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2016 7:34:55 PM
Posted: 1 week ago
At 10/25/2016 8:24:15 AM, Stupidape wrote:
I was thinking Satan = science. Well, philosophy and science are closely linked. I think Satan was simply an early philosopher. Like Plato, completely human no magical powers or anything. I think he was despised, which is clearly indicated in the Bible.

The reason Satan was likely despised is because he asked questions. He didn't obey unquestionably. I think he existed because many of the Bible stories are based at least part on truth and reality.

Like many other philosophers he was hated and killed by a religious group. I think he should be viewed as a human philosopher and should be mourned as a scientific martyr. Any thoughts?

Nah you are giving Satan human characteristics instead of angelic ones.