Americans’ belief in God, the devil and other spiritual entities has fallen to a new low, according to a Gallup poll released on Thursday. Seventy-four percent of Americans said they believe in God…
Americans’ belief in God, the devil and other spiritual entities has fallen to a new low, according to a Gallup poll released on Thursday. Seventy-four percent of Americans said they believe in God…
Creatures that do not exist are incapable of holding ideas in their minds and spreading them.
Demons aren’t physical creatures, they’re the ideas that prompt demonic behavior. They don’t die because they’re born of ignorance, hatred, and fear.
So, a metaphor for ideas that lead to ugly human behavior. Got it. XD
I also believe that we are the information we contain. The problem with referring to sociopathic memes that lead to bad behaviors as literal demons is that there are significant numbers of people who believe that there are literally physical monstrous evil creatures from hell that tempt people into bad behaviors, (as evidenced in the link.) Using the same language they do is likely to reinforce their absurd beliefs even though you mean something different.
I’m telling you there’s no difference. Ideas are more alive than man. Look at Kenneth Copeland, Donald Trump, Ron DeSantis. They’re possessed with murderous ideas and they will destroy themselves and everyone around them before they’d seek forgiveness and absolution.
I just spelled out the difference.
Have more longevity != more alive. See the definition of life here. Ideas/memes are not comprised of matter with biological processes.
I agree that they all contain, spread, and celebrate many sociopathic ideas, but that does not life make. Memes are interesting in that they propagate in a similar way to biological organisms, like pathogens do, and can be studied in many similar ways, but that does not make them alive.
I think most of the confusion here has to do with your use of the term, “literally,” which you are literally using incorrectly.
Ok, I can see you’re limited by your materialist mindset. I don’t need to convince you. I will only tell you that understanding that there are angelic and demonic ideas that can possess and control our lives allows you to develop a tactic to counter or utilize their effects. Everything that’s known about resisting and defeating demons is reflective of the necessary tactics one needs to resist and defeat demonic ideas. The Temptations of Christ are parables designed to teach the reader how to avoid the temptations of ignorance and malice. Everything known about invoking angels and Gods is reflective of what needs to be done to utilize those ideas in your life.
Hoo boy, sorry to discover you have a propensity for magical thinking. Yes, I am proudly a materialist, and my beliefs are founded in physical evidence. Since beliefs that are not founded in evidence are seldom dispelled by it I’m going to wish you a good day and stop wasting my time here.
When man invented machines, he began believing God was a machine. Now that man is creating computers, we believe the universe is a simulation. Invariably when people say there is no God, they’re completely unable to satisfactorily define God.
Because there isn’t one. So there’s no way to define something that doesn’t exist.
I think you failed that one. We passed it though.
If Yahweh doesn’t speak to you he doesn’t listen to you either. The first thing would be just as easy as the 2nd thing.
I wasn’t talking about Yahweh. That name is a religious invention. I’m not religious.
deleted by creator
Then I don’t know why you use words like “God” when it is a completely meaningless word except as a character in ancient fictional stories.
You got a good enough idea: that humans embody the demonic ideas and essentially become the demon they act out while they act it out. I can agree with that but not in a literal sense, only figuratively/metaphorically.
Your inflexibility makes your illustration very fragile though. Insisting you mean literally in the dictionary sense will break your idea over from “ok, sure maybe” into “this fellow’s mind may not be fully functioning as it normally would”
I’m not here to call you names like conspiracy theorist, but you’re insisting in the same style as one, which is a major turn off.
That said, ideas live longer than man, that is easily seen. The fascism you’re talking about is just that, weird fascist leavings of some of the worst parts of our society that have been left alone to simmer for too long now. What do you think about that? It being political rather than it being demons?
All I can say is that before you judge my perspective, you should ask yourself if you’ve got the necessary theological and spiritual background to understand what you’re critiquing. I’m not talking about pop-religion. I’m referring to ancient concepts and frameworks for understanding reality that existed long before modern capitalist materialist concepts of the mind.
“My point, once again, is not that those ancient people told literal stories and we are now smart enough to take them symbolically, but that they told them symbolically and we are now dumb enough to take them literally.” ― John Dominic Crossan
Well, not gonna lie, I wasn’t expecting to be insulted. If you’re just going to question my intelligence when I try to engage in good faith with what you posted, you would have done better to have just not responded.
There’s a “mystical stuff that only I can understand so I won’t bother explaining” air that you have about your reasoning that is very representative of people who have nothing to back up what they’re trying to say. I’m calling you out as ignorant of what you’re saying now, partially because I’m annoyed at you, partially because I’m pretty certain you can not coherently put a narrative together that will make any sense.
That’s a direct challenge to you to tell your story and theories. If you don’t want to, that’s totally fine, you don’t have to, but don’t insult my intelligence when I’m trying to give you so many benefits of the doubt that you’ve done nothing to earn.
You’re the one who decided to take offense. If you’re so troubled by a quote then you’ll never survive on the internet. I didn’t say I wouldn’t explain, but I certainly don’t want to tiptoe around your sensitive feelings. If you get nothing from this exchange, it’s no skin off my back.
Oh, I see your reading style now, that is certainly not ideal…
I told you why I got annoyed with you: because you insulted my intelligence. Do you think the quote was the insulting part? It wasn’t, it was the “check yourself before you wreck yourself” you brought out in your first line.
Let’s try this again:
I think your ideas are wrong. I want you to show me how I’m wrong. You are engaging in an argument instead of showing me your ideas. This is not what I want nor what I am interested in.
I don’t care about this particular conversation, we can stop having it when/if you decide to start telling me why you believe these things.
Like damn, dude, can you not see I’m trying to get why you have the position you have?
So you’re annoying to me. Big fucking deal. Does it not mean anything that I’m still trying to engage with your ideas despite you constantly twisting away to say more inexplicably cryptic stuff? Stop engaging with this pointless internet argument and tell me something interesting, please!
I swear, the worst I have to offer is a “that’s interesting” and then I’ll be on my way.