wonkothesane

I realized recently - but it took a while to build up to - that out of all the fictionial/metaphorical charicters in the Bible, that I like Satan the best. (No, I don't worship him, or any other fictional charicters...except maybe Capt. Picard, but that another story.)

Seriously, look at it. God commited, or commanded to commit - infanticide, genocide, murder, rape, etc...and destroied cities, a whole world full of people (in the fairy tale) and brought upon countless plagues and pestilence. Not to mention tourting his closest and most loyal worshiper.

He's also an ego-maniac who demands blind faith in him, worship, and will send you to hell to burn forever if you don't believe in him.

So, what on an equal level has Satan done? Disagree with God? (Hell, people disagee with me all the time, but I don't kill their firstborn or send raining frogs on them!)

And look, what was the *one* tree forbiden from eating in the garden? The tree of *Knowledge*. God wanted us to remain *stupid* and complacent! So what did Satan do, get us to eat the fruit! (Like 'ol "omnisescent" God didn't see *that* one comming! Right!)

So, in a boxing match, I'd root for Satan. I mean look, he's just gotten press, from one someone on these forums said, is people that oppose sex and eating uncooked cookie dough!

- bryce.

sakrilege

They were chums for awhile, since satan would visit god in heaven, heck, god even gave satan permission to torment Job ...

Job 1:12
And the LORD said unto Satan, Behold, all that he hath [is] in thy power; only upon himself put not forth thine hand. So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

winstonjen

I'd say bad press. Although that YHWH bloke doesn't make himself look too good either (book of Job).

Asha'man

I think Satan is actually God, and God is actually Satan.

Clearly, the author of the Bible had crummy morals, and wanted to sow confusion across mankind. Therefore, the author must have been the evil one of the two, not the good one.

It also is a good way to shock fundies, telling them that the Bible was written by Satan (meaning the evil guy), and they can't possibly prove that it wasn't.

Kenneth

The struggle God and Satan is our version of the struggle between Young and Old.

God represents old ideas. Satan represents new ideas. God represents conservatism. Satan represents Liberalism. (God represents the GOP; Satan represents...ok I won't go that far.)

All I am trying to say is that the bible was written by people who belong to the old order (not just old age). They are people who wanted to preserve the old way of life. In their attempt at preservation, they must show that youthful ideas--rebellious, energetic and new--as something dangerous; in fact, it would be better if they could show it to the people as something evil.

One of the virtue the old were trying to impose on the young is "obedience."

Sin is not more than disobedience to the Law. Genesis tells that the Sin of Adam and Eve was not pride, but disobedience.

Obediance was made for you, young man.

I am assuming that Satan was celebrating his 18th birthday when he launched that coup against God's authority.

Happy Birthday, Belzee!

Ojuice5001

How interesting. My real name is the same as yours, and the first of first posts I've seen shows that like me you are interested in the dynamic between the Old and the Young. This dynamic is the true principle active in the world, much more so than good and evil, or certainty and doubt, or mind and matter.

Now my patron goddess is the Roman goddess of the past. So as for me, I favor the Old. An unpopular point of view, but it really does make sense. I'm not opposed to any of the good things that have recently become known, but the past really is a great thing. I much prefer the moderation and instinct of the past to the excess of energy and planning that characterizes the present. What about you?

Polycrates

This is a subject that really interests me, because the biblical portrayal of Satan is so muted in comparison to what you tend to hear from the fire-and-brimstone preachers. I wrote a thing on this a while ago, here's the relevant bit



From reading the Bible I see Satan as a rather Promethean figure, more so than Jesus, who at first glance fits better. For those who don't know, Prometheus was the Titan of foresight, who stole fire from the gods, and thus was punished by Zeus by having ravens peck at his always-regenerating entrails for all eternity.
He knew full well that this would be the consequence (the foresight thing), yet altruistically chose to do it anyway (there are various versions, but I think this is the most common). Prometheus was a justifiably admired figure amongst the Greco-Romans. At first, Jesus seems to fit well as a parallel, in making a sacrifice for the benefit of humanity. However, a closer examination of biblical text surprisingly seems to suggest Satan to be better fitted to this role.

I think most Christians would be surprised, not only at how little Satan is mentioned in the Bible, but also how strangely little evil he does. If you don't believe me, do a bible seach for 'satan' or 'devil'. I am completely ignoring whatever Pat Robertson, Jack Chick et al may have told you, I am referring to Satan's character ONLY AS REPRESENTED IN THE BIBLE.

1) Satan and his angels rebelled against God, knowing full well the consequences, and as a result was forced to suffer eternally in hell. Considering how much of a bloodthirsty tyrant the bible portrays YHWH as being, I see such rebellion as a moral stand on principle against God. Satan knew he could never defeat God, and knew that he would be punished eternally for it, yet he nonetheless chose to stand up in principle against the tyrant that God is, which to me shows great strength of character, and I for one hold that in great respect.

2) Satan can quite plausibly be seen as always attempting to assist mankind, and suffering for it, and his rebellion can be seen plausibly as rebellion against the suffering he and God know will be inflicted on mankind by God's hand. If the serpent in Genesis can be taken as being Satan, we can here see him as Promethean, by giving 'fire' in the sense of knowledge, to humanity.
In Genesis 3:5, he tells Eve that it will make them like gods, which is interestingly the justification given for Zeus' wrath against Prometheus. He doesn't ever tell her 'eat the apple', he merely tells her the reason for God not wanting them to eat from it, which God neglects to tell in Genesis 2. Satan offers the tradeoff of knowledge vs happiness.
I think it is a personal decision whether Satan was misguided in this. It is possible that he does not know the consequences of eating the apple, but even if he does, it is a valid choice to offer. Knowledge can be considered happiness of a sort, not just from the intellectual pleasures that it allows, but also by the freedom it provides. That knowledge causes happiness can be (admittedly somewhat cruelly and I apologise) evidenced by the fact that most people would not want to be intellectually disabled, such as suffering downs' syndrome, despite the fact that many such people are amongst the very happiest in the world. Therefore there was a definite benefit to be given by the eating of the apple, which God had not told them about, yet which he let Eve weigh against the potential negative consequences.
Admittedly, Satan was sparing with the truth when he said that they would not die as a result, but he did not actually lie as such, as they did not die but apparently lived for 900 years or so. Such sparingness could indicate either a judgement on Satan's part that the pros outweighed the cons, or just that he honestly did not know.

The book of Job offers the greatest indictment against Satan's character (if one assumes it actually is Satan being referred to) And that's not to mention the fact that it's just as great an indictment of God's character. However, it seems likely that this was not about Satan at all, as the correct translation is 'evil spirit'. This is also used to describe the 'evil spirit from God' that comes upon Saul. Also, notice that here God does not rebuke Satan, he brags to him and goes along with his bet. Everywhere else God is strongly in opposition to Satan, and this does not fit, unless the evil spirit is a different entity. This also fits because God admits to creating evil as well (Isaiah 45:6-7, Amos 3:6, Proverbs 16:4).
Even if this was Satan, it does serve to point out how morally corrupt God was to humanity, and thus could still be seen as a service to humanity.

In Zechariah 3, Satan does nothing except accuse Joshua, for which he is rebuked. There is no foul deed here except his accusation against Joshua. Personally, I believe this is a perfectly moral thing to do, because Joshua, if the book of Joshua is true, is the greatest mass murderer in the history of mankind, surpassed only by God Himself. The whole book of Joshua is full of accounts of Joshua committing genocide on a massive scale, killing women and children as well, and even torturing animals. I believe this shows Satan's great moral character, that he is disgusted by the 'glorious' deeds of Joshua.

Even in the New Testament, no actual bad deeds are attributed to Satan beyond 'tempting' people and generally slandering him with barely a shred of even anecdotal evidence to back up these libelous assertions. It doesn't really bother saying 'Satan is bad because he did this crime and that crime etc', rather it mostly resorts to just 'Satan is bad' or 'Satan is bad because he opposes God'. Even in Revelations, I was particularly surprised to find the devil not actually doing anything bad.

Satan's main 'crime' of the New Testament is the temptation of Judas Iscariot, making him betray Jesus. But had Satan not done this, Jesus would not have been killed and nobody would have been saved. In this sense, Satan is trying to help humanity by killing Jesus. This is also evidenced when Satan tempts Jesus and tells him to throw himself to the ground in Luke 4:9, which is a clear attempt to make Jesus die and thus allow the salvation of humanity.

Thus for his helping of humanity, Satan does suffer and make a significant 'sacrifice' by accepting eternal torment for helping humanity. This is true altruism. He took onto his own shoulders an infinitely severe punishment on behalf of others, not to mention the scapegoat vilification, and recieved no benefit in return.

Doctor X

Polycrate:

Welcome to the forum. Just to add to your argument, that Satan is really not a big part in the biblical texts:

does not occur in the biblical texts.

Best,

--J.D.

winstonjen

Context, my friend, context! That's what the fundies will tell you!

Doctor X

Ah yes . . . that is correct, "interpret strict when it supports you and loose when it does not!"

--J.D.