Ask them if they think this scripture is true:
2 Corinthians 10:13 — God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear
They woud definitely agree
Then drop the bomb on them: Well, your stupid god evidently allowed Eve to be tempted beyond what she could bear!
How, after all these years, had I never noticed that before?!
If Jesus could not be tempted, then why would the Devil expend the time and energy in doing it? Jesus resisted because he was perfect, but no one says that he couldn't be tempted.
Clearly, when Jesus asked the Father to remove the bitter cup, he knew that the price would steep and that he would suffer and die. He was informed that the choice was his, but he also was told the consequences would be catastrophic for the rest of us, so he persevered.
To say he wasn't tempted just doesn't make sense given the situation.
Satan TRIED to tempt Jesus, but our lord just didn't swing that way.
But, as annointed pointed out, the whole temptation story really is stupid. It just shows how ignorant these allegedly inspired authors really were.
I had a discussion with 4 JWs today and they told me that Jesus could not be tempted, ( they say that he would not be perfect if he could) but also they told me that Satan tempted Jesus in the wilderness.
Can anyone clarify their beliefs please. I like to give them a reasoned argument when I talk to them, but have never noticed this conflict of ideas before.
My believes are that the existence of such "Satan" is worse than the idea of the existence of a God as per atheists. The concept of such being (a) is too convenient, a contrived way of explaining and blaming everything that goes wrong, doesn't make sense or is untrue. The concept of Satan is just a cop out. (b) makes less sense than the concept of Adam/Eve as per the Bible itself.
First, is that being is supposed to be the way the Bible describes it, Satan is 1,000 morally better than the paranoid, childish, bipolar schizophrenic Jehovah of the Bible. When you look at the behavior of both, seems like Satan even has better manners than Jehovah.
Second, calling "absolute justice" to letting people be/live and suffer for millennia the way they have simply for Jehovah make a point that he's being fair about that Satan thing doesn't look like justice at all from any angle you look at.
As for Jesus being "tempted" in the wilderness, that just reminds me of gay men in central park. That's how relevant that is.
JWs have a leadership that speaks out of both sides of its gob. Hence, ask 23 JWs a question and you'll probably get 23 different answers all designed to protect the leaders.
I used to believe the whole god/Jesus thing but cannot anymore. Being a JW for so long poisons everything.
"...he will not let you be tempted beyond what you can bear..."
Looking back, this concept - and it's (IMO) failure - was a significant component in my fade.
"Yep! They let the 'great minds' in 'Brooklyn' sort it all.........." - DOC
Yes Desirous Of Change, I couldn't agree more. That thought reminds me of the Talosians in the original Star Trek pilot episode.
If Jesus could not be tempted then what was the point of tempting him? The whole exercise was meaningless, therefore likely didn't happen.
Honestly every now and then the witnesses come up with something a little bit logical but don't take it all the way.
If Jesus didn't actually die ( the way Adam purportedly has) how Is it a ran some sacrifice...how does it 'balance the scales'. Effectively Jesus felt some pain he didn't have to.
Cold steel (Jesus) He was informed that the choice was his, but he also was told the consequences would be catastrophic for the rest of us, so he persevered.
Which is effectively no choice.
It sounds a lot like Jehovahs idea of "free will" - do as I say or you die.
smiddy - Isnt it true that the Old Testament does not identify" Satan" as any one being ,Angel , God , Spirit being or otherwise ?
The personification of Satan as a fallen Angel is non existent in the Old Testament writings ,it was only introduced in the Christian Era of the New Testament.?
Isnt that correct ?
Yup. At the time when the Old Testament was being written, Jews didn't understand "Satan" as we do now. They thought "Satan" (ha satan) was really just another angel who was accomplishing God's will by being an adversary in the heavenly court. So, technically, the personification of Satan as a fallen angel is indeed non-existent in the Old Testament.
However, this notion was not technically introduced in the Christian era of the New Testament. I think it would be more accurate to say it became highly popularized by Christians, but dualism (because this is what it is—the belief that there are forces of good and evil, angels and demons, God and Satan) was already introduced to Judaism long before Jesus was born. It was the Essenes, the Jewish sect that flourished from second century BCE to first century CE, who placed the cosmic battle between angels and demons, God and Satan, in the centre of their belief system. The notion that Satan was a fallen angel was already being developed before Jesus. Nonetheless, you are right in your conclusion that it has never been the belief of mainstream Judaism, and as such, the Old Testament was never meant to be read the way Christians read it.