Did Jesus call the Old Testament God the Devil, a Murderer and the Father of Lies?

[Drich]

Clearly the text is trying to say their father is the devil .....

but ... it's interesting, ... very interesting if you have your literary "radar" turned on.
This text obviously reflects a MUCH LATER (highly developed) theology and cultural viewpoint.
The words are "placed in the mouth of Jesus" but clearly he would never say these things to Jewish contemporaries.
It's a *later* view of Jesus talking in a later voice.

how does this reflect a later view point? what chronological queues are you observing to make this determination

what makes you think Jesus would never speak to the religious leadership that way?

What of all of the other passages where Jesus out right slams the religious leadership for being inept or blind guides?

I have told you and gave you examples of Jesus over and over calling the religious elite out is what got him killed or do you ignore all of that for your hippy version of jesus... you know the one you tested in your life and you know he does not exist?!?!

---

Clearly the text is trying to say their father is the devil .....

but ... it's interesting, ... very interesting if you have your literary "radar" turned on.
This text obviously reflects a MUCH LATER (highly developed) theology and cultural viewpoint.
The words are "placed in the mouth of Jesus" but clearly he would never say these things to Jewish contemporaries.
It's a *later* view of Jesus talking in a later voice.

Jews at the time didn't really have a concept of the devil.  Look at the old testament, Satan was the angel who did yhwh's dirty work, not his adversary (the jews at least realise that having an unbeatable enemy would put the crimp in the plausibility of an all powerful being).  They also didn't have a concept of an eternal soul, for them paradise was pretty much the same as for the Babylonians who they stole the idea off of, a perfect garden where there was no evil and everybody co-existed peacefully under the direct supervision of their gods (or after the jews returned from Babylon, their god).

Much of the later christian retconning was to try and fit the jumble of conflicting beliefs from the various sects and the beliefs picked up when trying to sell their religion to the Greeks into the framework they had decided to graft their new cult onto in order to legitimise it.  Hence why most of the new testament shows a deep and abiding misunderstanding of jewish theology.

yes the jewish version is indeed the biblical version, and he is a servant meaning he is not an equal opposing force. he has limitations and has been allowed to oppose God with in limitations or boundaries.. for most in the church however the greek or roman understanding of an underworld king is what the devil is.. in truth satan in the ruler of this world,, hell is where he is sent to be punished for eternity. This world is the closest thing satan has to a kingdom.

When you worship this world this morality the things of and in this world you are pledging allegiance to satan. again not as an all powerful anti God, but as a servant charged to lead people away from God.

---

Doh ... I missed the most obvious point. 
The "Devil" (Satan) as a "person" is an important Christian concept. 
The "Devil" as originator of evil, is not a Hebrew concept.  
Obviously this dialogue would make no sense to Jews in the 1st Century CE.

Edit : It appears Wololo and I were writing at the same minute ... I agree completely.

ezekiel 28 and isaiah 14 tell of lucifer's origin and primary role.. But, also don't forget the whole book of Job is all about satan being allowed to temp job to curse God..

 How can you say the ot does not mention satan when there is a whole book dedicated to him? when he appears in the opening 3 chapters of the bible and when he is dotted 20 more times through out the NT?

that's right you are not very smart, you don't check your sources and you never ever look anything up.. you just go with what sounds good from others who feel as you do..