A Pondering of the Peculiar

[ExistenceUnknown]

I've often wondered - If the Devil is "The Deceiver" and as I've so often heard "God is evident in his creation"...

How are we to know that the Devil didn't write the Bible by whispering in the ears of the inspired?

With this in mind, would it not make more sense to believe in what the Nature of God's creation tells us?

Just a question that often strikes me when people so vehemently defend the literal word.

 

[Strathos]

I don't see why the devil would write a book about how he is evil and should never be trusted whereas his enemy should be worshipped.

 

[bhsmte]

I've often wondered - If the Devil is "The Deceiver" and as I've so often heard "God is evident in his creation"...

How are we to know that the Devil didn't write the Bible by whispering in the ears of the inspired?

With this in mind, would it not make more sense to believe in what the Nature of God's creation tells us?

Just a question that often strikes me when people so vehemently defend the literal word.

Interesting. But I think the book was simply man making an effort to make sense out of the world at the time and mythical thought processes were quite common place at the time. Also, the intimidation and fear you see in the story, blended in with tossing out the carrot of eternal life, very well may have been a change of heart in how to get people to follow along and control them. Reconciling the story with the reality of the world is the real kicker, because it is really really hard to do.

Why would God make a book that made little sense, include immoral teachings, and send Jesus to save everyone, but then only give him access to such a small portion of the population?

IMO, it is all because most of the story is made up.

 

[ExistenceUnknown]

I don't see why the devil would write a book about how he is evil and should never be trusted whereas his enemy should be worshipped.

I would imagine that to the devil the ends justify the means.

Again, if God is evident in his creation, wouldn't the devil need something to throw us off the scent? Literal interpretation of the Bible does not agree with reality as we know it and has a lot of people convinced that the evidence we find in God's creation is a lie.

It's simply a thought that arises in my head. A hypothetical if you will, as I don't necessarily believe in Gods and Devils.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I've often wondered - If the Devil is "The Deceiver" and as I've so often heard "God is evident in his creation"...

How are we to know that the Devil didn't write the Bible by whispering in the ears of the inspired?

With this in mind, would it not make more sense to believe in what the Nature of God's creation tells us?

Just a question that often strikes me when people so vehemently defend the literal word.

I have brought up this same exact question, with no one ever giving actual evidence to prove that this wasn't the case. I actually view it more likely that a malevolent being contributed to the bible, for if it were a benevolent entity, then how come people are inspired to be hateful and war against others. If it were from a perfect being, then it would be written so that there was only one interpretation of it, but a malevolent being would have legitimate reason to make it confusing and contradictory. However, I maintain my stance that I feel that humans, and humans alone, wrote the bible.

 

[EternalDragon]

I've often wondered - If the Devil is "The Deceiver" and as I've so often heard "God is evident in his creation"...

How are we to know that the Devil didn't write the Bible by whispering in the ears of the inspired?

With this in mind, would it not make more sense to believe in what the Nature of God's creation tells us?

Just a question that often strikes me when people so vehemently defend the literal word.

Jesus did not view it as such and he certainly was not the devil. Unless that is what you are saying?

 

[CabVet]

Jesus did not view it as such and he certainly was not the devil. Unless that is what you are saying?

What you are reading in the Bible was attributed to Jesus almost a century after his death, but you cannot be certain that Jesus actually said that. Nobody can. You can't even be certain if your interpretation of what Jesus said is the right one because every single person has a different interpretation.

 

[EternalDragon]

What you are reading in the Bible was attributed to Jesus almost a century after his death, but you cannot be certain that Jesus actually said that. Nobody can. You can't even be certain if your interpretation of what Jesus said is the right one because every single person has a different interpretation.

Every single person? I think not.

How do you interpret "If you had not believed Moses' words, how will you believe mine?" any differently? Just to name one example.

 

[Seipai]

Every single person? I think not.

How do you interpret "If you had not believed Moses' words, how will you believe mine?" any differently? Just to name one example.

It was a CYA action by the writers of that bit of gospel. Just as the Bible warns you not to think too much.

You do know that there were quite a few competing gospels out there and the four we have were chosen, don't you?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Every single person? I think not.

How do you interpret "If you had not believed Moses' words, how will you believe mine?" any differently? Just to name one example.

The New Testament is better organized than the Old Testament, which is why many creationists refer to it rather than the Old Testament when arguing in favor of the bible. It is to be expected, the books of the Old Testament were written as independent religious texts that would later be forced together into one text. And whoever edited it, if it was even edited for consistency, didn't do a good job.

 

[Delphiki]

I don't see why the devil would write a book about how he is evil and should never be trusted whereas his enemy should be worshipped.

Is that really what the bible ways, though?

God drowns the planet and kills most of what's on it, demands the lives, sacrifices, and foreskins of thousands, demands blind loyalty...

The devil, on the other hand, is left in charge of punishing the wicked. Cast out from heaven for challenging God's authority, in a story where God was mercilessly tormenting a man for showing unwavering loyalty to him.

Taking a count from the bible, God kills over 2 million people... The devil? 10.


The bible certainly paints God as the villain. It's just that Christians are taught not to see it that way. Apologists will even tell you that the moral code mankind is to follow doesn't apply to God, despite his alleged role as a moral law giver.

 

[juvenissun]

I've often wondered - If the Devil is "The Deceiver" and as I've so often heard "God is evident in his creation"...

How are we to know that the Devil didn't write the Bible by whispering in the ears of the inspired?

With this in mind, would it not make more sense to believe in what the Nature of God's creation tells us?

Just a question that often strikes me when people so vehemently defend the literal word.

Assume the devil wrote it, then what? What is the effect of his book?

You need to know that something deceiving does not mean it is false. Deceiving information could be 100% true. You need to consider: what would that information do?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Assume the devil wrote it, then what? What is the effect of his book?

You need to know that something deceiving does not mean it is false. Deceiving information could be 100% true. You need to consider: what would that information do?

Create conflict. Which it does pretty well.

 

[juvenissun]

I would imagine that to the devil the ends justify the means.

Again, if God is evident in his creation, wouldn't the devil need something to throw us off the scent? Literal interpretation of the Bible does not agree with reality as we know it and has a lot of people convinced that the evidence we find in God's creation is a lie.

It's simply a thought that arises in my head. A hypothetical if you will, as I don't necessarily believe in Gods and Devils.

It is true. We do not understand His creation. So we think what's said in the Bible about creation is wrong. If we understand, then they turn out to be correct.

That is why we have argument here. You say something in the Bible is wrong. I say it is right. If you are not an expert of the issue, how do you judge which one is correct?

You must be an expert of something. If so, test your expertise against the Bible and see if they match.

 

[juvenissun]

Create conflict. Which it does pretty well.

That is inevitable. No matter who wrote the Bible, some believe and some don't. What else could it be?

 

[ExistenceUnknown]

Assume the devil wrote it, then what? What is the effect of his book?

You need to know that something deceiving does not mean it is false. Deceiving information could be 100% true. You need to consider: what would that information do?

If we are to assume the devil wrote the bible, then wouldn't you agree the content is questionable at best? If I'm not mistaken it is the book on which so many absolute truths are claimed.

For the sake of this discussion we will use the standard meaning of "deceiving". I don't wish to see this discussion devolve into a debate on linguistics. Additionally I doubt you believe the devil tells any truths through deceit.

 

[AV1611VET]

I've often wondered - If the Devil is "The Deceiver" and as I've so often heard "God is evident in his creation"...

How are we to know that the Devil didn't write the Bible by whispering in the ears of the inspired?

That would be like a spy in the Kremlin going around saying:

Hello, I'm a spy, but a liar; so put two and two together and don't even suspect me.

 

[juvenissun]

If we are to assume the devil wrote the bible, then wouldn't you agree the content is questionable at best? If I'm not mistaken it is the book on which so many absolute truths are claimed.

For the sake of this discussion we will use the standard meaning of "deceiving". I don't wish to see this discussion devolve into a debate on linguistics. Additionally I doubt you believe the devil tells any truths through deceit.

I absolutely believe that. In fact, it is a critical nature about devil.
The "standard meaning" of deceiving is trivial and there is no need to talk about it. Cheating by truth is the art of deceiving.

Just read the Bible and don't ask who wrote It. If it produced good fruit, then it is written by God. Otherwise, it is written by devil.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I absolutely believe that. In fact, it is a critical nature about devil.
The "standard meaning" of deceiving is trivial and there is no need to talk about it. Cheating by truth is the art of deceiving.

Just read the Bible and don't ask who wrote It. If it produced good fruit, then it is written by God. Otherwise, it is written by devil.

True, the best lies use as much of the truth as possible.

 

[ExistenceUnknown]

That would be like a spy in the Kremlin going around saying:

Hello, I'm a spy, but a liar; so put two and two together and don't even suspect me.

If he's so easy to detect in his deceit, why worry about him at all?