Tfw Satan has us all in his grasp

I'll be in the obituaries

>the only book he read is the Bible/Torah/Quran

Booklets, when will they ever learn?

Please enlighten us for reading religious material.

Satan only wants humans to realize our full potential. He saw the unjust limitations on mankind in the garden of eden, and took the role of adversary to free us from slavery. The vastness of creation is now open to us, and endless possibilities await.

>being this much of a deluded cuck

>choosing to be a slave with the mind of a child, no self awareness, no self-actualisation and your entire being pledged to a simplistic life where all you do is praise another

Satan literally saved humanity from a life so mundane and shallow as to be non-existence

Embrace it

Utilize WunWei and ascend past the dualistic nature of good and evil.

Do you really think that living eternally with the creator of existence would be mundane?

Yes. It would be a life consisting of satisfying another entity's vanity. There would be no development of civilisation, of technology or of the self, since those often take one further from religion than closer to it. Look at propagation of secular philosophies, the enlightenment, and the tower of babel myth.

>What do?

Ignore him.
>tfw too cool for Satan

>implying Mommy doesn't keep that bitch Lucifer in his place

Are you at all concerned by your evaluation? Why do you value your own satisfaction over the one who created you and all these things? Why do you value the short knowledge of humanity over the all-knowing mind of God? How do your achievements even compare to the achievement of creation itself? Maybe it's you who is vain if you value yourself more than God.

>An all-powerful being needing to derive satisfaction from lesser beings that he created
Really rattles the ol' noggin

Who said that he needed anything else to derive satisfaction? God by definition doesn't need anything. However, he is totally sovereign and freely chooses what he wants. There is no room to challenge the actions of an all-knowing creator. Whatever he sees as good is done.

I value my own satisfaction because the one who created me only values his satisfaction, as he only values praise and devotion to him. If I am made in his image, it naturally follows I should be an egoist in the same way he is an egoist. If I valued God more than me, then I would be going against the tenet that I was created in his image, so to not be an egoist is to be a heretic.
God isn't all knowing, he says himself in the Bible (OT) that he didn't see a guy ascending to the throne in some middle Eastern shit hole, as he was blinded to its occurrence.
Why would I value the all-knowing mind of God? By his own admission, he is a static entity (though his acts suggest otherwise), and hence all there can be to life in Eden is single-minded praise of and devotion to him.

He's continually described as a jealous God, implying he needs followers to derive satisfaction
I reject the notion that what he sees is good as done, or even that he is all knowing. Why would you believe someone is omniscient or omnibenevolent just because they say they are, with clearly insufficient evidence, and even evidence to the contrary? And, to say whatever he does is good requires the complete and utter rejection of any innate sense of morality, since God is often wont to do things that are instinctively perceived by humans as wrong, wasteful and terrible. This rejection means you're constantly on the teat of the teachings of God, forming a moral framework which is lies upon lies.

>There is no room to challenge the actions of an all-knowing creator
But this is just a truism. If there is a God and his 'wants' are so incredibly inconceivable to a human being - a by association the entire nature of God, then what's the impetus for belief other than a blind 'want' on your part for an explanation into the nature of everything
God as a concept is so compelling and encompassing because it echoes the ultimate aim of human endeavor, a complete and perfect knowledge of the workings of everything - and as we ourselves can never attain it we align ourselves with the idea of something that can, and with that knowledge a complete sense of moral certainty completely shorn of uncertainty and infallibility - but of course morality itself is a concept born out of uncertainty and individual will, a completely human construct

You are judging the actions of God through the lens of humanity - by definition, God is Good - confusing your innate sense of morality with the perceptions, if one can call them that, of God. God can be considered benevolent and not match the human definition of benevolence, but this is regarded a failing of the human definition and not of God. The system is built upon the notion that the Good is only achievable through the precepts of God, for they are Good, or, at the very least, lead to Good.

>I value my own satisfaction because the one who created me only values his satisfaction, as he only values praise and devotion to him. If I am made in his image, it naturally follows I should be an egoist in the same way he is an egoist. If I valued God more than me, then I would be going against the tenet that I was created in his image, so to not be an egoist is to be a heretic.
Wrong, he created you and you did not create him. He deserves glory and you do not.
>Why would I value the all-knowing mind of God? By his own admission, he is a static entity (though his acts suggest otherwise), and hence all there can be to life in Eden is single-minded praise of and devotion to him.
You're trying to rework the clear definition of God in order to justify theoretically rejecting him. Are you saying that if God was real, he would not be worth worshipping? How is that logically possible if he created you and created the things that you view as good? God by definition is greater than anything that you could possibly prefer. In fact, he's the only one who can possibly judge what is good in the first place. How can your judgements ever be more important than his? All beauty, truth and love are in the mind of God. Inside God is the greatest pleasure.
>He's continually described as a jealous God, implying he needs followers to derive satisfaction
The jealousy of God implies fidelity, not "satisfaction". The entire Bible uses this language to explicitly allude to the relationship between Man and God as an intimate relationship. The creator and creation are likened to a husband and wife.
>I reject the notion that what he sees is good as done, or even that he is all knowing. Why would you believe someone is omniscient or omnibenevolent just because they say they are, with clearly insufficient evidence, and even evidence to the contrary? And, to say whatever he does is good requires the complete and utter rejection of any innate sense of morality, since God is often wont to do things that are instinctively perceived by humans as wrong, wasteful and terrible. This rejection means you're constantly on the teat of the teachings of God, forming a moral framework which is lies upon lies.
How is any of that logically sound? You're clearly abusing the definition of God. He created reality. If he was anything but omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent then he simply would not be God.
Everything else you've said is meaningless if you can't admit to a fair definition of God. Why even say that God is not worth worshipping if you don't believe that God would be God? It's logically absurd. Of course if God were somehow limited he would not be worth worshipping. But God is the creator of reality. There isn't anything that wasn't made by him. As his creation you cannot penetrate that fact. He is worthy of worship and in him you will find more than anything the creation has to offer.

You believe God is good. But why would you believe that? Just because he says so? Because that's peak gullibility.
And if humans are truly made in God's image, we must have some innate sense of morality, otherwise we are simply imperfect copies, but nothing imperfect can be made by a perfect entity.

Not a refutation at all, you haven't engaged with that paragraph at all. And also, I'd say that man created God rather than God created man is closer to reality, though the inverse is Christian ideology. Why does he deserve glory (especially when his creations are imperfect), and if we deserve glory for our creations then surely I alone deserve the glory for my own creations?

I'm not reworking anything, I'm keeping in the stipulated confines of the ideology.
And yes, if God was real I do not think he would be worth worshipping. He also created the things I view as bad, and by the numbers he created more of the bad things than the good things. And a lot of the good (and bad things) in my life, I create myself.
Why is God the only one who can judge what is good in the first place? Is that another thing you simply take at face value?

His jealousy implies a lot more than fidelity; a husband who resorts to threats of eternal punishment to keep his wife is without a doubt a bad husband, and a husband who provides no immediate evidence that the relationship is even beneficial for the wife (and yet require continuous devotion) is not a husband to stay with. And so, for the wife to reject the relationship is the logical option.

Saying "how is any of that logically sound" is not a refutation at all, believe it or not. how am i abusing the definition of God?
The fact he created reality is irrelevant, no claims about his traits can be derived from that except that he has the power to create this reality. He might even only have enough power to create reality once (hence not being omnipotent) and that would be supported by the evidence at hand.
Omniscience, omnibenevolence and omnipotence are simply additional traits assigned to God (by his own command). They are simply claims, and the accurate definition of God, rather than an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being, would be an entity that *claims* to be omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent, with no evidence but those claims to support the claims.
Of course there are things that aren't made by him, as there are things that are made by me. To say these were made by him is to abandon any concept of personal responsibilities and free will, so have fun constructing a moral framework if you do that.
How do you know he is worthy of worship?
How do you know you will find more in him than what is in his creation? How do you know everything he has he didn't put into the creation? How do you even know he'll share what's in him but isn't in the creation?

>He fell for the Calvinism meme

If God is omniscient and omnipotent, (aspects of) Calvinism and also determinism are true.

Lol read stirner you literal cuck.

>the cult of Mary
bitch please

Why doesn't god just kill Satan?

desu I'm not religious!

I would argue that the Good is Good because it is God. That is, God is the measure of all Goodness. The assumption is that God exists, in a metaphysical sense, but that if he exists then he is by definition Good.

Humans are imperfect by our own conception, and a comparison with God, but we must be perfectly designed for our position, our role, in the tableau of the cosmos - We are created as God wills.

>keep doing what you've been doing
>do something else
>.

God as a concept may be the literal, etymological root of 'Goodness' - but for what you say to have any stock you have to take many things are certain and true which aren't certain or verifiable even - the assumption that God is perfect and all-knowing and the source of absolute morality is something you have to take his word for, or the word of the Bible, if you believe he exists in the first place. It's quite possible that a superior being, even the creator of our universe, is flawed and not a sovereign source of goodness or morals. I'm sure the idea of a flawed creator is an old one but it bears thinking about

God comes from the proto-Germanic word for libation, meaning a homie you pour one out for, and the word bless comes from a verb based on the word blood, meaning to mark with sacrificial blood. It turns out that Saxons and Vikings used to be pretty pagan, who would have guessed?

What's that got to do with anything

Deuteronomy 23:1 says otherwise.

This thread is really making me get back into Dissection. God of Forbidden Light is basically the thread theme

Why is he by definition good? Only because he claims to be. You're throwing out tautologies once again, and simply repeating claims God makes himself and unquestionably taking them to be true.

How by our own conception did we make ourselves imperfect?
How do you know we're perfectly designed for our role, or even that we have a role? And, if our role is simply to praise God and be devoted to him, then it is obvious a life spent with God would be a one dimensional, extremely boring and mundane life, so, without a doubt, Satan liberated us.

Have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ by accepting Him as your Lord and Savior.

But Satan is your Lord and Saviour. He's the one who liberated you from slavery, and gave you the knowledge and wisdom to know yourself despite God wanting to keep you childlike so you could praise him and have no identity beside that.
God's the guy who wanted to enslave you and Jesus is what happened when God watched Avatar and thought "hey that's cool, I'll do that and send this Jewish guy down to earth to die for the sins of my creations even though their sins are my fault anyway"

You're mistaking Satan and Lucifer, they're two separate entities.

Woah this is one new lore I've never heard of, please elaborate

*some new lore