Religious Training In Public School?

[Damaged Eagle]

Pay for your own brainwashing. Kids who aren’t christian don’t need to be brainwashed with Christian dogma in school.
Unless if course they’re going to be taught Jewish or Buddhist or other beliefs.

no doubt that would still make christofascisrs happy

View attachment 431119

So now you're admitting that brain washing is taking place in the public schools.

Perhaps it's time to make sure it's only reading, writing, and arithmetic that's taught there since that's all a child really needs.

*****SMILE*****

The very existence of the public education system sans universal academic choice is unconstitutional. Your notion is to impose yet another collective—one size fits all—pedagogic regime on individuals in violation of the imperatives of natural law.

View attachment 435163

Imposing a one sided political theme to their teaching is also a violation of individual rights.

*****SMILE*****

What in the world is a one-sided political theme, and what does your assertion, whatever is, have to do with me given that I'm a classical liberal, a Lockean of natural law and unbridled individual liberty?

My proposal is they only be taught the basics. How to read, write, and do math. If the parent wants anything else; religion, philosophy, history, etc, etc, etc,...; then they can pay for it.

Not much in the way of any sort of brain washing or institutional revision available in teaching the very basics.

*****SMILE*****

 

[alang1216]

More nonsensical than usual. You're saying that 'they' vote for policies regardless of what 'phrase' you wish to put in front of it? That sounds like reason and not what you espouse, faith in an ideology.

Faith is an ideology?! What's that supposed to mean?

It may mean reading is not your strong suit since I actually wrote "faith in an ideology". Makes perfect sense to me.

Well, we both know that's not true given my obvious intelligence. Rather, as we both know, my question demonstrates that I merely misread your post. Okay. So are you saying that reason and faith are mutually exclusive, and if so, why?

I'm surprised you'd need to ask, given your obvious intelligence, but so be it. Reason requires facts and evidence, faith does not. That is the very definition of faith.

 

[Ringtone]

More nonsensical than usual. You're saying that 'they' vote for policies regardless of what 'phrase' you wish to put in front of it? That sounds like reason and not what you espouse, faith in an ideology.

Faith is an ideology?! What's that supposed to mean?

It may mean reading is not your strong suit since I actually wrote "faith in an ideology". Makes perfect sense to me.

Well, we both know that's not true given my obvious intelligence. Rather, as we both know, my question demonstrates that I merely misread your post. Okay. So are you saying that reason and faith are mutually exclusive, and if so, why?

I'm surprised you'd need to ask, given your obvious intelligence, but so be it. Reason requires facts and evidence, faith does not. That is the very definition of faith.

Mindless, new atheist slogan speak.

I'm surprised you would say such a silly thing given your obvious reading skills, but so be it.

Sound reasoning requires facts and evidence. Faith is merely a complete trust or confidence in something . The latter is either reasonable —i.e, predicated on facts. evidence and sound reasoning—or not.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Clearly you are daft about separation of church and state.

If religion was taught in public schools all religions would have to be taught in schools which would devoid time on other studies.

Subjects like robbing, raping and looting?

 

[alang1216]

More nonsensical than usual. You're saying that 'they' vote for policies regardless of what 'phrase' you wish to put in front of it? That sounds like reason and not what you espouse, faith in an ideology.

Faith is an ideology?! What's that supposed to mean?

It may mean reading is not your strong suit since I actually wrote "faith in an ideology". Makes perfect sense to me.

Well, we both know that's not true given my obvious intelligence. Rather, as we both know, my question demonstrates that I merely misread your post. Okay. So are you saying that reason and faith are mutually exclusive, and if so, why?

I'm surprised you'd need to ask, given your obvious intelligence, but so be it. Reason requires facts and evidence, faith does not. That is the very definition of faith.

Mindless, new atheist slogan speak.

I'm surprised you would say such a silly thing, given your obvious reading skills, but so be it.

Sound reasoning requires facts and evidence. Faith is merely a complete trust or confidence in something . The latter is either reasonable —i.e, predicated on facts. evidence and sound reasoning—or not.

faith
/fāTH/
noun
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

As you said, evidence and sound reasoning are not required for faith.

 

[Ringtone]

More nonsensical than usual. You're saying that 'they' vote for policies regardless of what 'phrase' you wish to put in front of it? That sounds like reason and not what you espouse, faith in an ideology.

Faith is an ideology?! What's that supposed to mean?

It may mean reading is not your strong suit since I actually wrote "faith in an ideology". Makes perfect sense to me.

Well, we both know that's not true given my obvious intelligence. Rather, as we both know, my question demonstrates that I merely misread your post. Okay. So are you saying that reason and faith are mutually exclusive, and if so, why?

I'm surprised you'd need to ask, given your obvious intelligence, but so be it. Reason requires facts and evidence, faith does not. That is the very definition of faith.

Mindless, new atheist slogan speak.

I'm surprised you would say such a silly thing, given your obvious reading skills, but so be it.

Sound reasoning requires facts and evidence. Faith is merely a complete trust or confidence in something . The latter is either reasonable —i.e, predicated on facts. evidence and sound reasoning—or not.

faith
/fāTH/
noun
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

As you said, evidence and sound reasoning are not required for faith.

Nonsense! You dishonestly skipped over its primary and more general meaning. You got that definition from Google, which is actually quite stupid given that belief in God proper is predicated on both empirical and rational evidence. Behold the philosophical ignorance of its author. Moreover, what precisely, does Google mean by spiritual apprehension? What, precisely, does Google mean by proof?

Google is unwittingly asserting materialism—without proof!—and stupidly precluding the immaterial imperatives of logic, morality and mathematics. This is what happens when one is dumbed down by the state schools and popular culture. It's why you, for example, as I have pointed out in previous exchanges, cannot decipher the difference between metaphysics and science. This is why you fail to grasp that science is necessarily predicated on metaphysical imperatives, that metaphysics necessarily precede science. Get your metaphysics wrong, and you get bad science. The stuff of scientism.

Proof
noun
evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

Boy that Satan sure is kicking gawd's ass. The vast majority of humans who have ever lived (were talking 99%, here) have and had no knowledge of or interest in the iron aged abrahamic fairy tales.

They are actually recompiles Hinduism tales. The source of the information is a single source. And it encloses all religions.

Well that's all total, disprovable nonsense.

 

[anotherlife]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

I don't see the lack of Christian madrassah in place of public schools as a detriment. Angry, hyper-religious types such as the OP and perhaps you see things differently but we have a model for the type of society that you may want and it's been given a name: the Dark Ages.

I'm less inclined to believe that Devils or other boogeymen achieved anything with implementation of public, secular school systems.


The library of congress (link below), has an enormous catalog of early American history. It’s also important to remember that the framers of the Constitution were aware the early colonies of settlers were conclaves of religious intolerance, wherein a Baptist in one colony was safe, but a Roman Catholic was a criminal, yet in a different colony the reverse was true. This is completely unworkable and the Founding Fathers knew it.

The various sects of Christianity were completely at odds with one another as colonial states. Catholics couldn't live in one state, Quakers were executed if they went to another, Protestants were reviled in still others, and so on. These documents still exist. Anyone can research the laws of the original 13 colonies. It's amazing what one can learn.

America as a Religious Refuge: The Seventeenth Century, Part 2 - Religion and the Founding of the American Republic | Exhibitions (Library of Congress) (loc.gov)



"The priesthood have, in all ancient nations, nearly monopolized learning.... And, even since the Reformation, when or where has existed a Protestant or dissenting sect who would tolerate A FREE INQUIRY? The blackest billingsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolence, the most yahooish brutality is patiently endured, countenanced, propagated, and applauded. But touch a solemn truth in collision with a dogma of a sect, though capable of the clearest proof, and you will soon find you have disturbed a nest, and the hornets will swarm about your legs and hands, and fly into your face and eyes."
-- John Adams, letter to John Taylor, 1814

This is interesting. Socrates was sentenced to death / exile along the same lines too.

But what if truth is relative? Secular society seems to admit that. And in that case truth can have only two sources, good (God) and evil (the devil). It is then probably not a surprise that all religions suggest that all laws should come only from God and not a state.

I disagree that your versions of gods and devils exist. Therefore, I can't accept that there are exclusively two sources of truth.

I would generally agree that religions would prefer all laws come only from a God or gods and not from the state. It is in their respective interests, rather the interests of the religion's ruling class, to place the religion in a position of ultimate authority. That proscription was a disaster for Europe during the Dark Ages and similarly, a disaster for the Islamic Middle East, currently.

No because religions argue that laws should come from the grace of God and not anywhere else. Otherwise you generate sin, which is logical.

The medieval age was a true attempt at this indeed. But when modern age stopped it, we ended up with even worse situations.

Most notably, that the number of laws are now so high that nobody can even count them.

Humans are not created to function is such environment, demons are. This is why it was always safer to put legislation in the hands of churches rather than secular institutions.

Yes, religions want laws that the religions claim derive from their respective gods. So, how comfortable would you be if the laws here in the US came from the Hindu gods? I see nothing to suggest that the Christian gods are extant as opposed to the Hindu gods so that presents a problem. How comfortable would you be under the boot heel of Islam. The Islamic gods are alleged to be the same as the Christian gods (although the inventor of Islam has partnered himself with god), but the respective societies are clearly modeled upon vastly different ''truths''.

I would disagree that the Medieval age was an attempt at laws from the grace of the Christian god. At least in my opinion, it was the imposition of cruel, vicious and capricious rule by men who suppressed knowledge and learning because those elements were a threat to an institution of vast wealth and power.

There is not an improvement in laws by secular society for the past 300 years, in fact there is a rapid degeneration.

Churches were frequently turned into businesses of warlords , I agree. But democratic institutions and secular authorities degenerate even faster because they don't fear a higher power.

I would have to disagree about improvement in laws by secular society in the last 300 years. Secular society has allowed laws to flex and adjust as society has evolved. We can go through a list of those who ran afoul of church teachings and were persuaded (at the business end of a torch) that roasting marshmallows over their own burning flesh was the price for challenging church dogma. It was the church and their inflexible dogma that allowed for many of the horrors to be leveled at humanity.

Not very many astronomers being burned at the stake for predicting an eclipse these days. Not many old women being burned at the stake for witchcraft, either.

On the other hand, we see the positive results of representative democracy, when free of oppressive religious institutions, being able to advance societies which was impossible during the Dark Ages in Europe under the Christian church.

There is no freedom in democracy. The only thing that a secular democracy does is making your neighbor report you for whatever other than theology. If you are reported for theology then you may find God grace. Otherwise no. So democracy is that much worse. And by the way the witchcraft prosecutions were black witches prosecuting white witches through institutional authority.

I believe “no freedom in democracy” is incorrect. Historically, it has been religious authoritarianism which has oppressed populations. Unfortunately, it is the fundie Christian who believes that theocratic totalitarianism is the natural alternative to the secular institutions of Western representative democracy. How do you reconcile the ascendancy of the West and its representative democracy, largely being shaped around the principles of equal rights, personal freedoms and personal responsibility vs. the history of Dark Age Europe and Islamic majority nations that are based upon the principles of derision, learned hatreds and promotion of fear societies?

The secular west has a well oiled propaganda machine, those things that you write as achievements by the western secular societies are farcical.

Life is much more tightly controlled in secular western democracies than they were during the medieval ages or in Islamic countries or in Africa today.

I wouldn't agree. The achievements I noted are in large part because our secular governments have put a muzzle on religion. Freedom from religion is a central theme in the US Constitution. We see clearly in threads like this one that if the xtian Taliban had their way, we would be different from an Islamic Middle Eastern hell hole in terms of only the kinds of robes worn by the ruling Mullahs.

But which one is the bigger he'll hole? The Taliban doesn't issue your pensions to your hospice to force you to stay alive in your death agony in order not to lose that income? The Chinese and the progressive leftists do. They have already outprogressed every he'll hole that history could ever invent.

 

[anotherlife]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

Boy that Satan sure is kicking gawd's ass. The vast majority of humans who have ever lived (were talking 99%, here) have and had no knowledge of or interest in the iron aged abrahamic fairy tales.

They are actually recompiles Hinduism tales. The source of the information is a single source. And it encloses all religions.

Well that's all total, disprovable nonsense.

Look at the names Abram and Sarah. There was a post somewhere on this forum that presented their Hindu equivalents and they are almost identical.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

Boy that Satan sure is kicking gawd's ass. The vast majority of humans who have ever lived (were talking 99%, here) have and had no knowledge of or interest in the iron aged abrahamic fairy tales.

They are actually recompiles Hinduism tales. The source of the information is a single source. And it encloses all religions.

Well that's all total, disprovable nonsense.

Look at the names Abram and Sarah. There was a post somewhere on this forum that presented their Hindu equivalents and they are almost identical.

Yes, we know the Abrahamic religions are plagiaristic. But that Doesn't account for the many direct and clear contradictions not just among them, but among all religions. The unifying principle is NOT god or monotheism. It is the tendency for humans to believe utter nonsense and to ascribe magical attributes and causes where none exist.

 

[anotherlife]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

Boy that Satan sure is kicking gawd's ass. The vast majority of humans who have ever lived (were talking 99%, here) have and had no knowledge of or interest in the iron aged abrahamic fairy tales.

They are actually recompiles Hinduism tales. The source of the information is a single source. And it encloses all religions.

Well that's all total, disprovable nonsense.

Look at the names Abram and Sarah. There was a post somewhere on this forum that presented their Hindu equivalents and they are almost identical.

Yes, we know the Abrahamic religions are plagiaristic. But that Doesn't account for the many direct and clear contradictions not just among them, but among all religions. The unifying principle is NOT god or monotheism. It is the tendency for humans to believe utter nonsense and to ascribe magical attributes and causes where none exist.

You shall be surprised. Hinduism, and pretty much all religions have quickly discovetrd, that what the deception is is not the magic but the physical world. So it is the other way around.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

Boy that Satan sure is kicking gawd's ass. The vast majority of humans who have ever lived (were talking 99%, here) have and had no knowledge of or interest in the iron aged abrahamic fairy tales.

They are actually recompiles Hinduism tales. The source of the information is a single source. And it encloses all religions.

Well that's all total, disprovable nonsense.

Look at the names Abram and Sarah. There was a post somewhere on this forum that presented their Hindu equivalents and they are almost identical.

Yes, we know the Abrahamic religions are plagiaristic. But that Doesn't account for the many direct and clear contradictions not just among them, but among all religions. The unifying principle is NOT god or monotheism. It is the tendency for humans to believe utter nonsense and to ascribe magical attributes and causes where none exist.

You shall be surprised. Hinduism, and pretty much all religions have quickly discovetrd, that what the deception is is not the magic but the physical world. So it is the other way around.

Self delusion is not discovery.

 

[anotherlife]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

Boy that Satan sure is kicking gawd's ass. The vast majority of humans who have ever lived (were talking 99%, here) have and had no knowledge of or interest in the iron aged abrahamic fairy tales.

They are actually recompiles Hinduism tales. The source of the information is a single source. And it encloses all religions.

Well that's all total, disprovable nonsense.

Look at the names Abram and Sarah. There was a post somewhere on this forum that presented their Hindu equivalents and they are almost identical.

Yes, we know the Abrahamic religions are plagiaristic. But that Doesn't account for the many direct and clear contradictions not just among them, but among all religions. The unifying principle is NOT god or monotheism. It is the tendency for humans to believe utter nonsense and to ascribe magical attributes and causes where none exist.

You shall be surprised. Hinduism, and pretty much all religions have quickly discovetrd, that what the deception is is not the magic but the physical world. So it is the other way around.

Self delusion is not discovery.

There are two types of people in this world. The ones that are created by good that is God, and the ones that hard created by bad that is the devil. It is always interesting to see how these two arrive at opposite understanding when they look at the same thing. In othercwords, the same thing appears as two opposite observations for them.

This is described in the bible too, for example the same God ended up in opposite interpretations between Cain and Abel.

One of the major purpose to exclude religious education from public schools is to suppress knowledge like this. That is the flower people's ability to defend themselves.

 

[Blues Man]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

God made the devil and god is perfect and incapable of making mistakes

 

[anotherlife]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

God made the devil and god is perfect and incapable of making mistakes

On which verses do you base this argument? If all of the above is correct at all times, then it is only your free will that causes the problems.

And that leads to the paradox that your free will does not come from God. The further away you are from God, the bigger problem free will is. You may propose that the devil is a result of your free will. But then God created the devil only in the sense as God created Mona Lisa when Michelangeo painted it.

Alternatively, the perfection of God is a function of the distance away from God. You have to compensate for that distance with your free will. Since public schools invert the free will and give it to the devil, you are not compensating for the distance but making it worse.

 

[alang1216]

More nonsensical than usual. You're saying that 'they' vote for policies regardless of what 'phrase' you wish to put in front of it? That sounds like reason and not what you espouse, faith in an ideology.

Faith is an ideology?! What's that supposed to mean?

It may mean reading is not your strong suit since I actually wrote "faith in an ideology". Makes perfect sense to me.

Well, we both know that's not true given my obvious intelligence. Rather, as we both know, my question demonstrates that I merely misread your post. Okay. So are you saying that reason and faith are mutually exclusive, and if so, why?

I'm surprised you'd need to ask, given your obvious intelligence, but so be it. Reason requires facts and evidence, faith does not. That is the very definition of faith.

Mindless, new atheist slogan speak.

I'm surprised you would say such a silly thing, given your obvious reading skills, but so be it.

Sound reasoning requires facts and evidence. Faith is merely a complete trust or confidence in something . The latter is either reasonable —i.e, predicated on facts. evidence and sound reasoning—or not.

faith
/fāTH/
noun
2. strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

As you said, evidence and sound reasoning are not required for faith.

Nonsense! You dishonestly skipped over its primary and more general meaning. You got that definition from Google, which is actually quite stupid given that belief in God proper is predicated on both empirical and rational evidence. Behold the philosophical ignorance of its author. Moreover, what precisely, does Google mean by spiritual apprehension? What, precisely, does Google mean by proof?

Google is unwittingly asserting materialism—without proof!—and stupidly precluding the immaterial imperatives of logic, morality and mathematics. This is what happens when one is dumbed down by the state schools and popular culture. It's why you, for example, as I have pointed out in previous exchanges, cannot decipher the difference between metaphysics and science. This is why you fail to grasp that science is necessarily predicated on metaphysical imperatives, that metaphysics necessarily precede science. Get your metaphysics wrong, and you get bad science. The stuff of scientism.

Proof
noun
evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth

I'm actually surprised you take issue with this definition of faith. Are you saying your belief in God is based on evidence or proof? I'd love to hear about it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There are two types of people in this world. The ones that are created by good that is God, and the ones that hard created by bad that is the devil.

No, that is laughably absurd, immoral horseshit, and it makes you seem utterly insane.

 

[Blues Man]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

God made the devil and god is perfect and incapable of making mistakes

On which verses do you base this argument? If all of the above is correct at all times, then it is only your free will that causes the problems.

And that leads to the paradox that your free will does not come from God. The further away you are from God, the bigger problem free will is. You may propose that the devil is a result of your free will. But then God created the devil only in the sense as God created Mona Lisa when Michelangeo painted it.

Alternatively, the perfection of God is a function of the distance away from God. You have to compensate for that distance with your free will. Since public schools invert the free will and give it to the devil, you are not compensating for the distance but making it worse.

Did God create Satan or has he always been? - www.elizabethton.com

Peter teaches us that we should be ever ready to give an answer to all who ask questions concerning the scriptures and life. (1 Peter 3:15). The Bible reveals that God, indeed, created Satan. One thing we learn from the scriptures is that Angels were not from eternity. Nehemiah said, “Thou, even...

www.elizabethton.com

God created Lucifer then cast him down. God is a perfect all powerful being who could have snapped his fingers and wiped Lucifer from the universe but he didn't did he?

He intentionally left Lucifer alive because he likes to torment his creations.

 

[anotherlife]

There are two types of people in this world. The ones that are created by good that is God, and the ones that hard created by bad that is the devil.

No, that is laughably absurd, immoral horseshit, and it makes you seem utterly insane.

So if you don't believe that some people were created by God and some others by satan then how do you explain that the first hears the bible and intends good but the second can't hear the bible and intends evil? Even if they both try their hardest to do good? This is portrayed very well with Cain and Abel.

 

[anotherlife]

First global victory of the devil was the proud separation of church and state.

The second global victory of the devil is public schools.

Once you don't get the news that there is a Christ, or you reject Him, even if under peer pressure, your life will no longer be anything but running up a down escalator.

What better way to implement universal slavery than making you believe that it is your government that is God. Jesus rejected this in the desert.

But Stalin of the Soviet Union said that "the antichrists are the real enemies of socialism and we believe that we have to fight a real struggle against real enemies".

God made the devil and god is perfect and incapable of making mistakes

On which verses do you base this argument? If all of the above is correct at all times, then it is only your free will that causes the problems.

And that leads to the paradox that your free will does not come from God. The further away you are from God, the bigger problem free will is. You may propose that the devil is a result of your free will. But then God created the devil only in the sense as God created Mona Lisa when Michelangeo painted it.

Alternatively, the perfection of God is a function of the distance away from God. You have to compensate for that distance with your free will. Since public schools invert the free will and give it to the devil, you are not compensating for the distance but making it worse.

Did God create Satan or has he always been? - www.elizabethton.com

Peter teaches us that we should be ever ready to give an answer to all who ask questions concerning the scriptures and life. (1 Peter 3:15). The Bible reveals that God, indeed, created Satan. One thing we learn from the scriptures is that Angels were not from eternity. Nehemiah said, “Thou, even...

www.elizabethton.com

God created Lucifer then cast him down. God is a perfect all powerful being who could have snapped his fingers and wiped Lucifer from the universe but he didn't did he?

He intentionally left Lucifer alive because he likes to torment his creations.

This may be true and leads quickly to a version of the neo Cathar movement.

And also it leads back to the original question of all religions, why is there suffering and how do we stop it.

If God cast the devil down then it means God put a distance between Himself and the devil. And indeed, the longer the distance between God and a sybject, the lesser is God's grace and the greater is suffering. The devil is the fastest point away from God . The devil is infinitely evil and replaces infinite grace with infinite suffering. Furthemore, as the grace of God is a force of attraction the closer you get to god, also the evil of the devil is a force of attraction the closer you get to that, like a black hole that swallows up light.