Did the Devil make them do it?

Originally Posted by AngelBreeze

[color="Indigo"][b]

Your assertion "Also the scriptures that say that all scripture comes from God is not only self-serving (because who are you to question otherwise), but utterly false." is also incorrect according to the Holy Bible. Again, I quote you the Scripture that most certainly states that "ALL SCRIPTURE (emphasis mine) is given by inspiration of God, .... " therefore, I have to disagree with what you are saying.

Okay, so if I write a book, a post on my Blog, or even a message board post which states that everything I say "is the direct word of God", does that make it true?

I bet you and 99.998% of world population would think that I am crazy. In fact we had a now-suspended board member recently make such claims, and he received a similar reaction.

So what makes the Bible any different? What makes Paul any different? God has never dipped a divine quill into ink and wrote anything down. Furthermore, modern scholarship has proven that much of the biblical texts have been heavily edited because they either have parts with incorrect syntax for the time period in which they were supposedly written, or they have extra/missing parts when compared to earlier or later editions. So which one was divinely inspired? The original? The edited? was God the editor? Did God change his mind which needed an edit?

I am not saying that the Bible is 100% incorrect, nor am I willing to say that it is 100% correct. The Bible and all religious texts are written by fallible humans.

I understand this is difficult for many fundamental Christians to grasp (I don't know if you are one or not I am speaking as a former fundamentalist here), because that shatters the warm and safe glass house that everything is nice, orderly, neat, and most importantly infallible. However, a little research and a little common sense shatters the aforementioned glass home.

Also, the concept of the Trinity was invented at the Council of Nicea, Jesus never talked about a Trinity, he only spoke about his relationship to the "father". Therefore, the concept of a Trinity would be unfamiliar to Jesus to begin with. Therefore, to apply the Trinity and say Jesus actually "said" everything in the heavily edited Bible, which is composed of books/letters of questionable sources, requires making a giant leap of dogmatic faith that facts and serious scrutiny do not warrant.

Furthermore, even if the dogmatic Trinity is to be believed, each part is interrelated, yet unique with a unique role. Therefore, you could say Jesus was in the burning bush, present at the speaking of tongues at Pentecost, etc. but do you? No! It was God in the bush, and the Holy Ghost/Spirit at Pentecost. Therefore, it is more proper to say "according to Paul who was inspired by the H.S.", rather than attributing quotes outside of the 4 Gospels to Jesus. To say the entire N.T. is a lengthy post-mortem quote from Jesus, simply lends the non-Gospel books extra weight that they do not warrant, and also misleads people to believe that "Jesus" in the flesh actually stated things that he certainly did not.

Now I don't want to highjack this thread, so I wont respond further to this interpretive issue. Each of us is entitled to their own opinion and only by questioning, digging, and discussing things can understandings change and spiritual progression occur

I guess the devil is tempting me to question the Trinity and the Bible (a little humor)

[blackraven]

Originally Posted by Chrysaetos

They all had different reasons to do what they did. Racist ideas, religious indoctrination, poor childhood, damaged brains. There are many reasons why people do the things they do. Sometimes we justify their actions, other times we don't.

The idea of 'evil' comes from our idea of some kind of 'perfection'.. this may be a god, saint, saviour, ethical code, or a belief in a higher purpose or world. Everything that is not part of this 'perfection' is automatically seen as 'evil' or 'absence of good, love, or righteousness'. We come up with evil creatures, devils, conspiracies and more to explain why others are not behaving as good as we do, the 'common people', the 'poor people', the 'children of god' and what have you.

Our ideas of 'perfection' are an illusion. Humans do horrible things and wonderful things. In the end, we judge this according to our ethical codes we have grown accustomed to through culture, religion, upbringing etc. And I think that's okay. But it's good to look at each context separately.

Chrysaetos - I think you make some strong arguments. They somewhat follow the same train of thought that psychosclice brought up about one's upbringing and the use of labels. I can definitely see where one could take this whole 'evil' argument away from religion, again depending on one's personal upbringing and background (i.e. exposure to christianity). Who am I to say that some behaviors by humans are more horrific than others or more evil than others? I guess to do so I would be putting myself in a judgment seat. But then again, I do know right from wrong. Or do I? That would be based on my background again. Good argument.

Blackraven

[blackraven]

HBuck72 and AngleBreeze - Your input on this thread has been educational. In having a friendly debate you've allowed people reading this thread to learn more about what was at least 'recorded' in the Bible. People can interpret that recording however they will. Thank you. :)

Blackraven

The following satisfies my mind. It explains a lot.

Satan never assumed an anthropomorphic, individualized shape, until the creation by man, of a "one living personal god," had been accomplished; and then merely as a matter of prime necessity. A screen was needed; a scape-goat to explain the cruelty, blunders, and but too-evident injustice, perpetrated by him for whom absolute perfection, mercy, and goodness were claimed.
[...]

One cannot claim God as the synthesis of the whole Universe, as Omnipresent and Omniscient and Infinite, and then divorce him from evil. As there is far more evil than good in the world, it follows on logical grounds that either God must include evil, or stand as the direct cause of it, or else surrender his claims to absoluteness. The ancients understood this so well that their philosophers -- now followed by the Kabalists -- defined evil as the lining of God or Good: Demon est Deus inversus, being a very old adage. Indeed, evil is but an antagonizing blind force in nature; it is reaction, opposition, and contrast, -- evil for some, good for others.
[...]
"Lead us not into Temptation" is addressed daily to "our Father, which art in Heaven," and not to the Devil, by millions of human Christian hearts. They do so, repeating the very words put in the mouth of their Saviour, and do not give one thought to the fact that their meaning is contradicted point blank by James "the brother of the Lord." "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man." -- (The Gen. Ep. of James, i, 13).
Why, then, say that it is the Devil who tempts us, when the Church teaches us on the authority of Christ that it is God who does so? Open any pious volume in which the word "temptation" is defined in its theological sense, and forthwith you find two definitions: (1) "Those afflictions and troubles whereby God tries his people;" (2) Those means and enticements which the Devil makes use of to ensnare and allure mankind. (St. James i., 2, 12, and Mat. vi., 13.) If accepted literally, the two teachings of Christ and James contradict each other, ...

From The Secret Doctrine by H.P. Blavatsky

Originally Posted by HBuck72

Okay, so if I write a book, a post on my Blog, or even a message board post which states that everything I say "is the direct word of God", does that make it true?

Greetings HBuck72, If you wrote a book or blog I hope you are sensible enough to realize that it could never be the Holy Bible, in order for you to receive the direct word of God, therefore, that is an apples to oranges comparison you are making I hope you realize.


I am not saying that the Bible is 100% incorrect, nor am I willing to say that it is 100% incorrect. The Bible and all religious texts are written by fallible humans.

Yet it remains the INSPIRED word of God throughout the ages.


Also, the concept of the Trinity was invented at the Council of Nicea, Jesus never talked about a Trinity, he only spoke about his relationship to the "father". Therefore, the concept of a Trinity would be unfamiliar to Jesus to begin with. Therefore, to apply the Trinity and and say Jesus said everything in the heavily edited Bible, which is composed of books/letters of questionable sources, is making a giant leap of dogmatic faith.

The existence of the Holy Trinity is a Fact inasmuch as there is God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. That comprises the Holy Trinity of Three Persons in One. I do understand there are those who may not accept this but that does not detract from the fact that it is.

Furthermore, even if the dogmatic Trinity is to be believed, each part is interrelated, yet unique with a unique role. Therefore, you could say Jesus was in the burning bush, present at the speaking of tongues at Pentecost, etc. but do you? No! It was God, in the bush, and the H.S. at Pentecost. To attribute quotes outside of the Gospels to Jesus, is simply to lend them extra weight that it does not warrant, which misleads people to believe that "Jesus" in the flesh actually stated it.

Since Jesus is also God in the Holy Trinity (comprised of three persons in One), remember He said "I and my Father are One" (JOHN 10:30 KJV) and He also said "Before Abraham was, I AM" (JOHN 8:58 KJV) and that means that with His Divine nature He has been everywhere and has done the things of God at all times since time immemorial.

Now I don't want to highjack this thread, so I wont respond further to this interpretive issue. Each of us is entitled to their own opinion and only by questioning, digging, and discussing things can understandings change and spiritual progression occur

Fair enough, yet the things of God cannot be changed like some of the things of man.

I guess the devil is tempting me to question the Trinity and the Bible (a little humor)

It sure appears that way! But then he is the tempter of many! So, Beware.

Deus tecum, (\o/) AngelBreeze (\o/)

"For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an anti-Christ." -- II JOHN 1:7 (KJV)

"Jesus saith unto him, I Am the Way, the Truth, and the Life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me." -- JOHN 14:6 (KJV)

[innerlight]

Originally Posted by blackraven

Devil is a rebellious demon that tempts humans to commit evil deeds.

Hitler hated Jewish persons because they were the largest non-German ethnic minority in Central Europe and were regarded as parasites. He killed 1.5 Million people over 5 years. Was hitler a puppet of the Devil? That's as pure evil as evil can get.

My question is, do you believe the Devil is on Earth personally tempting humans such as Hitler, Charles Manson, or Jack the Ripper to commit such acts horror?

Or are humans born with a seed of evil in them and thus can go either way? Does society have more influence on the output of a human's development than religion?

What are your thoughts on the cause of the most evil acts committed by humans?

Blackraven

No, there is no tempting force or entity out there making people do what they want them to do. Nor are people inherently evil. People that do such things are the result of the individual and that individual themselves. Many times those in those shoes have become victims at some point in their life have been the result of something, or witnessed something. Their conditioning that they have reached throughout their life has created what you see as an "evil" person.

Each and every person is doing such things because they believe them to be true. They have reached that decision in their life.