>Define Satan as "the scariest thing that can be conceived"

>Define Satan as "the scariest thing that can be conceived"
>Satan would be scarier if he was evil and liked to torture mortals for his pleasure
>Satan would be scarier if he did all this from the shadows and kept his existence ambiguous to us
>Satan would be scarier if he was all-powerful, because that means we will never be able to defeat him
>Satan would be scarier if he was omnipresent, because that way we would never be truly safe from him
>Satan would be scarier if he existed
>Satan must exist

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Kek
    >inb4 god is not evil and LUUUURVES you unconditionally!!
    >just face the hardships he lays before you like a good goy because... because he loves you okay!?

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Satan is not scary, but he wants the worst for humans. He is an enemy to humans because God loves humans.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Wrong nagger

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      "god loves humans" is not the same as "god wants the best for humans."

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Wouldn't you want the best for someone you love?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I don't presume that god will follow my lead.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Abusive parents often times love their children, it doesn't mean they want the best for, or much less actually give, the best for their children.

            We all have an understanding of right and wrong, or good and evil. If God is the greatest being (in which case he must be the best in every aspect), it follows that he is also the most good.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              But is the good of a god useful to mortals?

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              If God created everything, he must have the capacity for everything, at a minimum we know he's capable of both the greatest and most miniscule of tasks, the most good and the most evil. To be God means to be everything, or at least, to be capable of everything. It doesn't follow that God would necessarily be the most "good" in the moralistic sense, only that be be capable of it. He can, of course, also be capable of the most evil, afterall he created it no?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Augustine would argue that evil does not actually exist, but evil is simply the absence of good, just like shadow is the absence of light. A shadow is not a thing that actually exists on its own, but it is defined by the absence or lack of light.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Interesting idea, yet the shadow still "is". One might argue that the shadow doesn't really "exist" by itself, but that dark that we call the "shadow" does in fact appear in reality regardless of the mechanism. All things that appear within reality must, naturally, be made by God. Now, evil in the context of human action can be explained away by the concept of free will, but evil in the context of natural disaster, disease, hunger, entropy and so on and so forth can only possibly exist by design, much like how a game developer might code in a particular mechanic, or a director of a film coordinates a particular scene, God must have made these things Himself.

                Now one could argue this is for some sort of reason, but nonetheless these things exist, and would typically be considered evil. One could then go ahead and say "Anything God does is good", but that's a cop-out, denying the essence of what the words "good" and "evil" really mean to most people in the first place. Thus, God must not only be capable of evil, but practices it intentionally.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I think you are right that God created the capacity for their to be evil. In the book of Job, whether you interpret it literally or metaphorically, Satan asks God for permission to afflict Job, and God gives the green light.

                You bring up two kinds of evil, moral and natural. You are also correct that moral evil arises from free will. The disasters and such are known as natural evil, and philosophers have suggested various reasons throughout the years for their existence. One explanation is the butterfly affect. I won't get into it here but I think you would find it interesting to look up some explanations for why "natural evil" is permitted.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Abusive parents often times love their children, it doesn't mean they want the best for, or much less actually give, the best for their children.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Define Glerpglorp, The Goblin Who Hates Ontological Arguments as "the being most effective at killing people who use ontological arguments"
    >Glerpglorp would be more effective if he existed
    >Glerpglorp must be sodomizing OP with a schoolbus right now

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Good, now go one step further.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >define op as a homosexual
      >op would be a homosexual if he sucks cock
      >op is a homosexual

      this logic is not logic

      not saying that he doesn't exist

      Satan would be scarier if he showed up at OP’s house and butt fucked him

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >define op as a homosexual
    >op would be a homosexual if he sucks cock
    >op is a homosexual

    this logic is not logic

    not saying that he doesn't exist

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    satan was already defeated

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Ok, but is scariness some a priori form that needs to be embodied?

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    all of this but
    >inciting and praying to God ends the tribulation

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *