No atheism talk here, just religion and fun stuff. I'm writing a 10-12 page paper comparing norse paganism with christianity and Mesopotamian polytheism.
I would also like to take the time to denounce mormonism.
Mormons claim that the book of mormon was written in 600 BCE and copied the book of Isaiah, in the original words. But they failed to realize that Lucifer is a latin name, and would not have been present in hebrew text (Joseph Smith claimed that he translated the ancient book of mormon when he was really just translating the freakin king james version of the bible).
OK new theory. Satan isn't a person at all, but it was the term for the accuser, therefore, when God judged (or accused) he was called "a satan," and when the new testament came around, satan evolved from a verb to a noun, thus creating the being "satan"
The one being referenced in Job was a god from the council of gods (elohim) and he was called satan because he was accusing man.
i guess it depends on your perspective how much that relationship extends, but it certainly means that satan is not equal to god. if you are doing the will of someone else, you are not the one in control
for the sake of not sounding like a broken record, see the post above. but if God used Satan to do his dirty work, would it be that big of a jump to claim that Satan was the name of God when he tests other people (i.e. wrath of god)?
Well it's only really a contradiction when juxtaposed, but the main point was that Satan wasn't capable of evil until God gave it to him, meaning Satan's will is just God's will.
Secondly, wouldn't the point of the verses be to point out that it was Satan who brought the evil upon them? This brings me back to my question of whether or not they're just two facets of the same being. (It isn't that large of a jump, since many other religions in that region believed gods had more than one side to them).
This is synonymous with my point that Satan's will is just God's will.
satan was under the authority of god, carrying out the dirty work, so to speak. this was to mutual benifit, as satan wanted to see the demise of man, and god wanted to punish them, but cannot contradict his own word .
in this case, forbidding census then telling david to order one, hence making him incur wrath
hence satan the deciever is the one for the job. satans actions, being under the authority of god, ultimately are the responsibility of god, hence the two perspectives.
IIrc every instance like that where it says satan in one place and jehovah in another (jehovah is the word when the old testament says lord, usually) it involves the wrath of god, carried out by satan
@Satan that sounds familiar, but I don't think it is a jerk move to say and argue that God doesn't exist. As long as it is an open debate and discussion, no one should care.
"And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath is in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand." (Job 1:12)
"[Job's friends and family] comforted him over all the evil that the LORD had brought upon him." (Job 42:11)
In the first quote, it's not a contradiction is it? It's really just Lord giving Satan power over the world, which is not of God.
The second one is Job's friends/family more angry with God about what He allowed, is it not? In the previous verse, God allowed Satan to have power over Job's life in the world, which is the result of God's allowance for him to do so.
i vaguely remember making that thread to facilitate the discussion on how god doesn't exist. but it could have been another, i feel like i made at least 5 threads on the subject
