UC Professor. No evidence in the Bible attributing Satan as being evil.

[Ingledsva]

Really because in post #173 You are trying to refute Revelations using the Tanakh. How much dishonesty must be pointed out before you give up?

Bull-you know what.

I am responding to different posts, with different information, pertinent to the argument of that particular post.

YOU brought up a NT verse about Satan falling.

There is no Tanakh verse about Satan falling from heaven.

Christians misread and misunderstood Isaiah 14 saying it is Lucifer/Satan falling from heaven, - when it is actually about a fallen Babylonian king.

Thus I asked - where does it say that in Tanakh?

*

 

[Enoch07]

For whatever reason the writer of the story wanted it to.

It's a STORY.

See more evidence of dishonesty.

You can't tell me why the serpent spoke.

Yet the serpent cannot be Satan. It's just a random talking snake in your opinion. That told Adam and Eve God was a liar.

 

[Ingledsva]

I agree. Whether it literally happened that way is not the point. It is about what ideas the story conveys. IMO the literal inerrancy movement ruined those branches of Christianity that practice it. It is not what the writers intended. Admittedly much of the Tanakh is history whose core stories appear based in genuine fact. But again, it is the ideas the writer wanted to convey that is the real point.

Yep, and the stories keep getting twisted.

*

 

[Enoch07]

Bull-you know what.

I am responding to different posts, with different information, pertinent to the argument of that particular post.

There is no Tanakh verse about Satan falling from heaven.

Christians misread and misunderstood Isaiah 14 saying it is Lucifer/Satan falling from heaven, - when it is actually about a fallen Babylonian king.

Thus I asked - where does it say that in Tanakh?

*

UC Professor. No evidence in the Bible attributing Satan as being evil.

The thread is about the Bible. Look at the title. You brought up the Tanakh! Does that title say anything about the Tanakh? More evidence of dishonesty and deceit.

 

[Ingledsva]

See more evidence of dishonesty.

You can't tell me why the serpent spoke.

Yet the serpent cannot be Satan. It's just a random talking snake in your opinion. That told Adam and Eve God was a liar.

You are VERY OUT OF LINE here - calling me dishonest - for quoting exactly what the text says.

I don't have to tell you way the writer has a serpent speak. I just have to show that it is what he wrote.

IT IS A STORY!

Stop the ridiculous crap about me.

*

 

[Enoch07]

You are VERY OUT OF LINE here - calling me dishonest - for quoting exactly what the text says.

I don't have to tell you way the writer has a serpent speak. I just have to show that it is what he wrote.

IT IS A STORY!

Stop the ridiculous crap about me.

*

I am not asking what the writer meant.


Why does the serpent speak?

If you cannot answer that you do not have a place here on RF.

 

[Ingledsva]

UC Professor. No evidence in the Bible attributing Satan as being evil.

The thread is about the Bible. Look at the title. You brought up the Tanakh! Does that title say anything about the Tanakh? More evidence of dishonesty and deceit.

Tanakh is the Hebrew Bible and that is what the author of the book is concerned with. Look it up.

This is also obvious by his quotes and final analysis in the article ABOUT the Book.

Did he come up with Satan is evil? NO

Why NO? Because he was studying the Hebrew Bible which has Satan as a servant of God - doing his job, and NOT an evil autonomous being, which is what the NT says.

By the way - if you continue to call me dishonest and deceitful when you don't like my answers - I WILL TURN YOU IN.

*

 

[Enoch07]

Tanakh is the Hebrew Bible and that is what the author of the book is concerned with. Look it up.

This is also obvious by his quotes and final analysis in the article ABOUT the Book.

Did he come up with Satan is evil? NO

Why NO? Because he was studying the Hebrew Bible which has Satan as a servant of God - doing his job, and NOT an evil autonomous being, which is what the NT says.

By the way - if you continue to call me dishonest and deceitful when you don't like my answers - I WILL TURN YOU IN.

*

What the Devil? Prince of Darkness Is Misunderstood, Says UCLA Author of New Satan ‘Biography’

The article cites Revelations. This is about the NT, the Christian Bible. Not the Tanakh. As I have pointed out several times.

 

[Ingledsva]

I am not asking what the writer meant.

Why does the serpent speak?

If you cannot answer that you do not have a place here on RF.

If you cannot understand that the answer is BECAUSE THE AUTHER WROTE IT THAT WAY, - you have a real problem.

It is just a story - a fable.

The serpent speaks because the author of this story wrote in a talking serpent, - for his bronze age audience.

*

 

[Twilight Hue]

Well, then that shuts me out of the discussion.

You don't have to, and certainly are invited to continue on debating and discussing the narratives from the perspective of Christians if you wish. :0)

For me, I don't understand just why Christians regard Satan as evil when it's clear in the Bible there is nothing really to show in fact that Satan in terms as a deity is evil.

Even during the years as a Christian myself, I had never really thought along those lines, save for later on prior to leaving Christianity when questions like this started to rise.

What I find strange and bizarre is God's actions particularly in the Old Testament, are completely saturated with numerous acts of evil and brutality for which Christians for one reason or another completely exonerate God as being evil, and place the blame on the character of Satan. If you ask me, if there's any candidate for Godwin's law, it's definitely definitely the god of the Holy Bible and not Satan who remains rather benign throughout the Bible's passages.

I'm aware of the dichotomy by which Satan is used as a term, but for the majority of Christendom, Satan has pretty much been established as being another deity or entity as indicated by the war in heaven or the multiple conversations between God and Satan throughout the Old and New Testaments.

I tend to agree with Professor Kelly's determination that there is really nothing in terms of evidence in the Holy Bible that attributes Satan as being evil. There's plenty accusations, but no evidence in the Bible's passages that would justify those accusations.

Satan is clearly a very little talked about character in the Bible with little background to go on, strongly suggesting there might have been at one time a section or even a complete series of works that had been purposely cut out long ago that completes the narrative painting Satan In a different light other than by which he is being portrayed as being by Christians today.

I think there's a lot more to the Bible stories than what we see, and I find that interesting, givin my background in Christianity and the fascination I have for ancient mythology.

 

[Ingledsva]

What the Devil? Prince of Darkness Is Misunderstood, Says UCLA Author of New Satan ‘Biography’

The article cites Revelations. This is about the NT, the Christian Bible. Not the Tanakh. As I have pointed out several times.

The ARTICLE writer using NT is neither here nor there.

The AUTHOR of the BOOK which the article is about, - used the Hebrew Bible.

*

 

[Enoch07]

If you cannot understand that the answer is BECAUSE THE AUTHER WROTE IT THAT WAY, - you have a real problem.

It is just a story - a fable.

The serpent speaks because the author of this story wrote in a talking serpent, - for his bronze age audience.

*

The author wrote it that way for a reason.

Considering there is no other talking animals your claim is weak.

 

[Enoch07]

The ARTICLE writer using NT is neither here nor there.

The AUTHOR of the BOOK which the article is about, - used the Hebrew Bible.

*

Revelations is not in the Tanakh. You are in the wrong here. Good Bye.

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

The ARTICLE writer using NT is neither here nor there.

The AUTHOR of the BOOK which the article is about, - used the Hebrew Bible.

*

From the article:

"A scene in the NewTestament's Book of Revelation is often cited today as evidence that Satan was the deceiver of Adam and Eve, but the interpretation stems from a fundamental misunderstanding, Kelly argues.

'That ancient serpent' refers to the giant seaserpent Leviathan, not the garden snake of Eden," he said. "In Revelation, Leviathan has morphed into a dragon, or large serpent, with the seven heads and 10 horns,which is still further removed from the seductive serpent who deceived Eve."

Kelly, THE AUTHOR, definitely talks about the NT. Unfortunately he is also rather ignorant of what is in Revelation. The beast with seven heads and 10 horns comes out of the sea while the dragon stands on the shore. They are separate entities. Revelation 13:1 It is apparently through such lack of reading comprehension that Kelly confuses the dragon of Revelation 12:7-9 with the Leviathan of Isaiah 27:1. The Leviathan is not “called the devil or Satan” as the dragon is. Neither does it “lead the whole world astray” as he dragon does. Nor does it have angels like the dragon does. Not even close and definitely no cigar.

This is forty years of research? I think this is just a way to sell books and not serious scholarship at all.

 

[Ingledsva]

See more evidence of dishonesty.

You can't tell me why the serpent spoke.

Yet the serpent cannot be Satan. It's just a random talking snake in your opinion. That told Adam and Eve God was a liar.

LOL! You go back in time and read the storytellers mind and tell us all what the storyteller says is why the serpent spoke. When you read the story you come up with your own interpretation, as we can know nothing but that his actions get them kicked out of Eden. Obviously the reason he speaks to her.

The Serpent is not Satan because it does not say it is Satan. It says it is a serpent. Nowhere in Tanakh is Satan related in any way to a serpent. Nor is he called such in Tanakh. Nor does Tanakh warn against Satan, or serpent, - a bit strange don't you think, - if he is something to be afraid of. He is YHVH's servant in Tanakh, - thus no need to warn about him.

And again you are calling me dishonest - which is bull! Knock it off!

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

As you can see the serpent is again from the created beasts, not an angel.

He is just a catalyst prop in the story so A&E can be thrown out and start popping out babies. A how humans came to be spread out on the earth story. Nothing more.

Obviously I could quote the serpent verses, and what it says to Eve, and the resulting problems for A&E. But you are quite capable of reading the story.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

From the article:

"A scene in the NewTestament's Book of Revelation is often cited today as evidence that Satan was the deceiver of Adam and Eve, but the interpretation stems from a fundamental misunderstanding, Kelly argues.

'That ancient serpent' refers to the giant seaserpent Leviathan, not the garden snake of Eden," he said. "In Revelation, Leviathan has morphed into a dragon, or large serpent, with the seven heads and 10 horns,which is still further removed from the seductive serpent who deceived Eve."

Kelly, THE AUTHOR, definitely talks about the NT. Unfortunately he is also rather ignorant of what is in Revelation. The beast with seven heads and 10 horns comes out of the sea while the dragon stands on the shore. They are separate entities. Revelation 13:1 It is apparently through such lack of reading comprehension that Kelly confuses the dragon of Revelation 12:7-9 with the Leviathan of Isaiah 27:1. The Leviathan is not “called the devil or Satan” as the dragon is. Neither does it “lead the whole world astray” as he dragon does. Nor does it have angels like the dragon does. Not even close and definitely no cigar.

This is forty years of research? I think this is just a way to sell books and not serious scholarship at all.

Kelly attended a Jesuit seminary - he did not need to study Satan from a NT perspective for this book.

He studied Tanakh for the book, - and thus came to the no evil Satan conclusion -

Because there is no evil autonomous Satan in Tanakh.

*

 

[Grandliseur]

I am familiar with JW belief, but I'd still call it an afterlife just as I'd still call reincarnation an afterlife. An after-this-lifetime.

Right. But, nonetheless, the difference is immense. If you call them by the same term, you are confusing the heck out of many, me included. Afterlife to me denotes after death and while the body is in a dead state.

But, if you think you can distinguish the two from your definition, that is your problem then. I like to keep cats and dogs apart when they don't get along.

 

[Enoch07]

LOL! You go back in time and read the storytellers mind and tell us all what the storyteller says is why the serpent spoke. When you read the story you come up with your own interpretation, as we can know nothing but that his actions get them kicked out of Eden. Obviously the reason he speaks to her.

The Serpent is not Satan because it does not say it is Satan. It says it is a serpent. Nowhere in Tanakh is Satan related in any way to a serpent. Nor is he called such in Tanakh. Nor does Tanakh warn against Satan, or serpent, - a bit strange don't you think, - if he is something to be afraid of. He is YHVH's servant in Tanakh, - thus no need to warn about him.

And again you are calling me dishonest - which is bull! Knock it off!

Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?

As you can see the serpent is again from the created beasts, not an angel.

He is just a catalyst prop in the story so A&E can be thrown out and start popping out babies. A how humans came to be spread out on the earth story. Nothing more.

Obviously I could quote the serpent verses, and what it says to Eve, and the resulting problems for A&E. But you are quite capable of reading the story.

*

This thread is about the NT. Not the Tanakh. Build a bridge and get over it.

 

[Rough Beast Sloucher]

Kelly attended a Jesuit seminary - he did not need to study Satan from a NT perspective for this book.

He studied Tanakh for the book, - and thus came to the no evil Satan conclusion -

Because there is no evil autonomous Satan in Tanakh.

*

I see no amount of evidence will sway you. No need to continue.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The conundrum is - how do you write something specific which if understood by all could only be interpreted as truly being God's prophecy?!

No words would be convincing evidence of a god.The best that a prophet could do is wow us with his ability to see into the future, and then, only with high quality prophecy - specific, unexpected, not self-fulfilling, etc.

It is often amazing to bible readers that other people actually don't see it as the hand-written, inerrant, unmistakable, actual perfect "word of God," but rather, as something written by humans. And therefore entitled to all of the same respect or criticism (neither more not less) than any other piece of human writing.

That is nonsensical as it gets. How did you arrive at this conclusion?

I arrived at the same conclusion. Biblical scripture should be read critically like any other work not claiming to be fiction, and not under the assumption that what one is about to read is the infallible account of a good god.

People who oppose God remind me of someone who stands next to a super-volcano and screams at it, 'I do not want you to erupt and destroy my life.'

Yes, believers and unbelievers see one another differently. People who believe in gods remind me of someone who drops sacrificial children into a volcano while praying to an imagined deity to spare them their lives.

Incidentally, skeptics don't oppose any gods, nor do they talk to them.

I'll phrase the question a different way to get to the same result. A question I am willing to bet you still won't answer. Based on the text found in The Bible, do you believe that it states that God is directly responsible for the deaths of any human beings?

You made your point: The biblical god is a killer (and more), often viciously and brutally, and this is inconsistent with the belief that it is a good god.

When have you ever gotten a believer to admit to an inconvenient truth? They just won't. And if you try to force them to say what they don't want to say, you're in for some bad blood.

I ruined a friendship about 20 years ago trying over dinner to get a Christian friend to admit that according to his religion, I was going to hell to be tortured forever, and that I deserved it for unbelief. He didn't want to answer no, because that was his belief and he didn't want to contradict his god, but he also couldn't bring himself to admit that that is what he actually believed.

The relationship didn't survive the dinner.

If they are righteous, they get eternal life, so I think they are compensated, unless they were evil and didn’t have right to live forever. These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life. Mat. 25:46

How do you feel about abortion?

God gave Satan freedom to show his evilness in many ways, expect killing Job. And Satan well showed what kind of evil monster he is, if he is free to do things that he wants.

What does that make God?