The Devil

[Opoponax]

Yeah, pretty sure most of the devil's mythology is fan fic. (Of fan fic.) But religions are primarily oral myths. Whatever people believe, that's the deal. Whether or not it's supported by anything else is of secondary importance, to them at least.

I don't get how he can be so good at deception, yet people see him everywhere and see through his ploys immediately.

did you Read this thread? It seems to me you all think satan is the good guy here... None of you seem to be able to see your way through that deception

Well, yeah (in terms of Satan as good guy). Have you ever read Paradise Lost? Of course it's not from the Bible, but by far the most stirring words in that book (epic poem actually) come from the damned, even though it's doubtful Milton meant for it to turn out like that. 

Humans readily identify more with Satan because Satan is a lot closer to us than God. Satan makes mistakes, he weak, he's conflicted, whereas God is not only perfect*, he's a complete dick about it.

Now, as to not seeing through deception, the irony here is thick as two spooning sumo wrestlers. You're the one who believes in an invisible, voyeuristic man in the sky who watches everything we do, not us. And when asked to provide proof you trot out nonsense that's clearly wrong and long proven to be untenable. And then in the next sentence ridicule another field where rigorous study and hard work are purposefully subjected to thorough testing by the smartest people on the planet. So really, who's the one being deceived?

*Whatever perfect might mean to any given person.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

did you Read this thread? It seems to me you all think satan is the good guy here... None of you seem to be able to see your way through that deception

Well, yeah (in terms of Satan as good guy). Have you ever read Paradise Lost? Of course it's not from the Bible, but by far the most stirring words in that book (epic poem actually) come from the damned, even though it's doubtful Milton meant for it to turn out like that.

It is a great piece of literature I agree.

[Minimalist]

bad writing?

an oversight?

More likely piss-poor editing.  When the Zoroastrians brought Angra Mainyu (or Ahriman ) to the West it was a novel concept.  The devotees of yhwh, who were sitting in Babylon getting their first taste of advanced culture and who were certainly not "jews" in any modern sense of the word, suddenly had to incorporate a whole new paradigm into their silly shit.

[Drich]

Satan only does what he is allowed to do.

If he temped Eve it is because God wanted eve to face temptation.

I just want to be clear, because "allowed to" is not the same as "ordered to."  Is Satan created specifically to test people and try to lead them from God, or does he develop into that role and allowed to carry it out because it serves God's will?  If it's the former, that has to be the worst "good news/bad news" moment of all time.  But it would square with Jesus' description of him in John 8:44.

To be honest I have never give it much thought. I just assumed that he developed a disdain for God as he was one's God's goto guy.

Then i read what you said about john 8:44. What specifically in John 8:44 makes you think he was created as 'the devil?'

[Minimalist]

To be honest I have never give it much thought.

Among many other things.

[Tonus]

Then i read what you said about john 8:44. What specifically in John 8:44 makes you think he was created as 'the devil?'

Jesus claims that "he was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

It does not sound like the description of someone who stepped into a role (ie, his "beginning" refers to the point when he became the devil). It sounds like the description of someone who personifies wickedness, whose very nature rejected 'truth' and who is the 'father of lies.' If God wanted to test a creation that he decreed was "good" then what better option than to create a being who personified evil in order to muck around and try to break it? The story of Job and the temptation of Jesus in the desert make more sense from this perspective, though it makes God seem either fallible or proud.

[Drich]

did you Read this thread? It seems to me you all think satan is the good guy here... None of you seem to be able to see your way through that deception

Well, yeah (in terms of Satan as good guy). Have you ever read Paradise Lost? Of course it's not from the Bible, but by far the most stirring words in that book (epic poem actually) come from the damned, even though it's doubtful Milton meant for it to turn out like that. 

Humans readily identify more with Satan because Satan is a lot closer to us than God. Satan makes mistakes, he weak, he's conflicted, whereas God is not only perfect*, he's a complete dick about it.

Now, as to not seeing through deception, the irony here is thick as two spooning sumo wrestlers. You're the one who believes in an invisible, voyeuristic man in the sky who watches everything we do, not us. And when asked to provide proof you trot out nonsense that's clearly wrong and long proven to be untenable. And then in the next sentence ridicule another field where rigorous study and hard work are purposefully subjected to thorough testing by the smartest people on the planet. So really, who's the one being deceived?

*Whatever perfect might mean to any given person.

I have and I even know some of the back story on the story or how it came about.. In that the church's version of Heaven and Hell was so... inflated/augmented to support various other claims and doctrine that milton sought to help reconcile some of the dependencies on his own.

Paradise lost was my only understanding of Hell for a very very long time. and I know it sounds like I'm a crazy person for say this next bit, but my experience there was almost the literal opposite. No purgatory, no middle ground, no second chances, No fire, No Satan in charge, None of the pomp or pageantry. in essence it was an execution, be consumption though Hell fire.

Again as I studied over the next 20+ years I began finding bits of truth like puzzle pieces scattered though out scripture till one day i was able to vet every single major event that i witnessed first hand, and My experience was nothing like that of Dante's inferno.

Then I started to wonder why would we hang on to this version? Then it hit me. It's all apart of this final deception to 'humanize' the devil or to demonize Humanity (depending on which POV you are look at this from) Meaning if Satan is in charge of varing levels of punishment for varing levels of immorality like the 7 deadly sins (Which is not a bible thing BTW) then it allows for levels of morality or rather "Morality" (the lessor of two evils) it self. As morality is a form of 'righteousness' not of God. IF one can adopt this 'morality' over God and his perfect standard of righteousness then that person will never seek atonement or righteousness.

---

Then i read what you said about john 8:44. What specifically in John 8:44 makes you think he was created as 'the devil?'

Jesus claims that "he was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

It does not sound like the description of someone who stepped into a role (ie, his "beginning" refers to the point when he became the devil).  It sounds like the description of someone who personifies wickedness, whose very nature rejected 'truth' and who is the 'father of lies.'  If God wanted to test a creation that he decreed was "good" then what better option than to create a being who personified evil in order to muck around and try to break it?  The story of Job and the temptation of Jesus in the desert make more sense from this perspective, though it makes God seem either fallible or proud.

Then the question becomes the beginning of what. The beginning of time or the beginning of man? Remember we do have a whole back story to account for where Lucifer is the bright and shinning star of God. His right hand man, chief angel in charge of all other angels. Or maybe that betrayal of lucifer discounts all of his 'good works' which makes it all a lie.

[Tonus]

Then the question becomes the beginning of what. The beginning of time or the beginning of man? Remember we do have a whole back story to account for where Lucifer is the bright and shinning star of God. His right hand man, chief angel in charge of all other angels. Or maybe that betrayal of lucifer discounts all of his 'good works' which makes it all a lie.

That's the thing, in order to gain any insight we have to interpret. If you are referring to Isaiah chapter 14, we have the same challenge. On its face, Isaiah 14 seems to be a blistering condemnation of a now-dead Babylonian king, who sought to glorify himself above god and has fallen in disgrace like so many others. To apply it to the devil we must say that it has a second interpretation and we would have to find some way to corroborate it. But the Bible never mentions the name again. How can we be sure that Lucifer is Satan?

[Drich]

Then the question becomes the beginning of what. The beginning of time or the beginning of man? Remember we do have a whole back story to account for where Lucifer is the bright and shinning star of God. His right hand man, chief angel in charge of all other angels. Or maybe that betrayal of lucifer discounts all of his 'good works' which makes it all a lie.

That's the thing, in order to gain any insight we have to interpret.  If you are referring to Isaiah chapter 14, we have the same challenge.  On its face, Isaiah 14 seems to be a blistering condemnation of a now-dead Babylonian king, who sought to glorify himself above god and has fallen in disgrace like so many others.  To apply it to the devil we must say that it has a second interpretation and we would have to find some way to corroborate it.  But the Bible never mentions the name again.  How can we be sure that Lucifer is Satan?

In addition to this I also was considering Job 1, Ezk 28 what the book of revelation says, and Genesis 3 If you put all these pictures or glimpses together you have a pretty apt description of Satan.

[John V]

My question is about the motivation of the devil character in the bible.

The character is written as evil but torments people who are or have been evil.

If the devil is supposed to be evil why did the author give it this trait, which seems to conflict with its main drive?

Surely if the devil wanted to encourage evil acts then hell would be advertised as a super fun place with willing sexual partners of your choice and all the big macs you can eat

Is this inconsistency down to:

bad writing?
an oversight?

or what?

You're mixing Biblical traits with non-Biblical traits found in literature.