(February 8, 2015 at 8:47 am)Tonus Wrote:(February 7, 2015 at 9:20 am)Drich Wrote: If you understood the quote then I don't need to explain that if "satan" based the bible on what was done for us then no matter what you call the being who wrote the bible His role as 'God' remains.But if Satan wrote the truth then he isn't the author of all lies. But he calls himself that, so that line would be a lie! It's a paradox! Now every Bible will burst into flames in 3... 2...
-or the word 'satan' describes what some see as the ultimate embodiment of evil. And the word God describes the ultimate embodiment of good.
Now if a person is truly evil, then by the rules of a righteousness we defined with in self they see themselves as 'good.' Therefore the "ultimate embodiment of good" will be seen as evil when viewed through the lenses of an evil man's "selfrighteousnes."
On the flip side the ultimate embodiment of evil will seem to be good.
That is why some of you defend satan and curse God.
So again when I say a rose by anyother name would smell just as sweet... (No matter what you call 'God' he is defined by his actions.) Now if your definations force you to make the determination That God is evil, then perhaps it is how you define the actions of God that should be questioned.
