Those who have Judeo-Christian perspective: Is Satan a poor strategist?

by SweetBabyCheezits 25 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  james_woods

  That reminds me, why not eat from the Tree of Life anyway? According to Gen 2, only the Tree of Knowledge was forbidden, right?

  I thought the legend was that the Tree of Life had to be eaten from continuously, that it wore off if you didn't. At least, that was what the JWs I was around in the old days seemed to think. Adam and Eve began to age and die because they were cast out away from the Tree of Life. The guard angels had to keep everybody out until the tree was destroyed in the flood to keep them from living forever.

  Except, of course, that Jesus was also supposed to be perfect - like Adam - and there was no record of Jesus eating from the tree of life. Yet, the JWs say that Jesus would have lived forever (and could have fathered perfect children who would live forever) if he had not been crucified.

  Oh, well - just another little inconsistency. Much like all the questionable "Satan" stories.
• 

  Darth plaugeis

  The Hatred Satan (Dad) has for God is Blinding...... If he could of, I am sure he would of let Jesus Die Again and again and AGAIN!

  And whos the poor Strategist here Satan or God?

  God told everyone his plan.... and No one gets it!! even him I think!
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  Here's another branch on the bad strategist tree I call Satan: JWs insist that the apostate uprising in the early christian congregation was responsible for removing the "divine name" from the NT manuscripts, and yet they accept it to be inerrant now that their translation committee has supposedly restored Jehovah to it's proper place.

  For any of you ex-dubs who believe A) the bible is from a divine source, to be taken mostly literal and B) Satan is a real sentient being... Do you still believe the JW claim above?

  If your answer is yes, why do you think Satan would stop there? That would be yet another indication that he's a terrible strategist:

  I'm no superintelligent spirit who has existed for (depending on what you believe) thousands, if not millions of years. And yet if I was Satan and god permitted me to use my earthly minions to influence the most holy of books, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't simply stop at removing YHWH. I'd make it as confusing as hell. (I lean towards deism, agnosticism, atheism and this is the ONLY way I might accept that there's a literal god of love and a prince of darkness somewhere out there. We just wouldn't know it from holy writings because they've been so tampered with. But that hypothesis is so ridiculous because that means a god of love allowed all that to happen and billions of humans to suffer.)

  If your answer is no, how are were you able to question your old beliefs enough to recognize the fallacy of that claim and yet you still believe A and B, both of which require similar illogical lines of reason.
• 

  Billen76

  If we create our own terms and conditions, it is never very difficult to then prove them illogical only to dismiss them. This especially counts when we are dealing with irrational aspects of life. Fear is irrational, love is irrational, yet we all know them as part of our existance. Can you plan love? Do you know how and when you will hate?

  If we assume, that (hu)man was MEANT to eat the fruit, that eating the fruit was a natural part of (hu)mans developement, that it is part of our inheritance that we invoidable have taken part in eating the fruit of knowledge from the moment we became aware, where does that place God in the "equation"?

  What IS God then. It is said, God is love and it is said God is spirit. then what is love and what is spirit? Is love a person? Is spirit?
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  Good points, James. Now that you mention it, I do vaguely remember the WT explanation that the eating of the fruit had to be continuous.

  Darth, c'mon, wait for the punchline already.

  Billen, I haven't had enough sleep to grasp your points. I'll try to reread them after some rest.
• 

  SweetBabyCheezits

  BD: But I don't think that you can call Satan "dumb". I personally think he is a genious.

  Let's break that down, if you don't mind. What makes you believe he's a genius?

  I'd like to hear your reasons - other than the bible - because it seems to me he's been written into the scriptures with all the intelligence of a failing 6th grader. But suppose he is real and is a genius... well, if he had been allowed by the Judeo-Christian god (in principle) to tamper with holy writ, who's to say he didn't author the whole thing himself? How could you know if a less than benevolent spirit being inspired the bible and simply had himself described as a loving god (albeit with contradictory actions & principles)? Would you know it?

  *Obviously, I don't believe that. But it would make more sense to me (esp considering the atrocities of the OT) than claims that this uber important message came from the omniscient, omnipotent bible god who loves us but allows innocent children to suffer and die. Also, his fits of jealousy, rage, and self-absorbed demand for worship and adoration would make a little more sense then.

  BD: It makes absolutely no sense to me that Satan can be spiritualized. That also violates the rules of hermeneutics. Hermeneutics state that unless directly stated or directly obvious to any reader, everything must be taken literally.

  What about the rules of logic, such as 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence?' To me, if the bible is the sole authority on Satan and there's no other physical evidence for him (please explain if you disagree), and you state "if you believe in God as a real person, you MUST believe in Satan" then, in theory, would the inverse not be true, as well? As in, if belief in Satan as a real entity is unfounded....

  One last thing: are there similarities between the rules of hermeneutics for the Bible and the Koran?