Friday, June 22, 2012

The God of the Bible is Actually Satan

It's quite funny actually.

I have been told hundreds and thousands of times that there are no contradictions in the Bible.  If that is the case, there is no other conclusion to make than God is actually the devil.

Read the story of David numbering the people in 1 Chronicles 21 and then read the exact same story told in 2 Samuel 24.  Only, they aren't the exact same story.  In the former, Satan makes David number the people.  In the latter, God does the evil deed (2 Samuel, if true, is much more sinister than the 1 Chronicles version, being that God made David do a naughty thing just so he would have an excuse to murder bunches of peeps).

But, again, I have been told, heatedly, that there are most definitely no contradictions in the Bible.  That the Bible is God's perfect, inspired, infallible, and most definitely, inerrant word.

Fine.  Have it your way.  God is Satan and Satan is God.

11 comments:

  1. There's an add for meeting Christian singles on your sidebar.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The add on my side bar promises to help me live a pure life by fleeing my lusts. Also some Japanese ladies. Another promises to explain the truth about the end of the world. Also a men's clothing company called "stayhard" is advertising. How do you do this? The side bar is all crazy and all over the place..

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have come to the conclusion that God and Satan ARE the same being. If you accept a benevolent loving personal "what a friend we have in Jesus" deity, there has to exist a malevolent ansty personal "screwtape letters" anti-deity for the universe to make sense. But each must be as powerful as the other or it doesn't work logically. And the only way they can each be all-powerful is if they are one and the same.

    Of course, I don't believe in a personal deity (of either benevolence or malevolence). I believe that humanity is the face of god, imago dei. And humanity, individually and collectively, is capable o simultaneous acts of egregious evil and great compassion.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I enjoy reading your blog. Thank you for this particular insight into a perfect and flawless book... . I had not known this was written. Very nice. Very interesting. I put both verses side by side and went back and forth for nearly an hour, cross referencing both against the other. I thought that maybe one might be from the lords perspective and the other from satans, but it is not. It is the same story, from the same perspective. How neat is this? What a crock of shit.

    ReplyDelete
  5. IC-I keep thinking about these verses. While I can't explain the difference in stories, I also keep thinking that it isn't as cut and dried as what you seem to present here. Translating the Bible from different language as well as from a different time gives us a slightly different account than what was probably originally written. And then the passages are about the very nature of God which was and is difficuly for us to fully comprehend (like asking an ant to describe an elephant!!) To me it's like a puzzle that I worked on recently. Two identical block pieces were supposed to fit together to make a pyramid. I did not see how it could be done! Two hours later I finally figured it out and then wondered how I could not have seen it sooner.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've heard that argument before. Find me the "original transcripts" and we'll have that discussion.

      That argument highlights a deep problem with the god of the Bible. If he gave a darn about whether or not you eternally lived or perished, he wouldn't make everything into a riddle that needs interpretation. That's like a parent who tells their kid to load the dishwasher, having never taught them, and then beating them when they screw it up.

      Delete
  6. I would say that instead of beating the kid when they screw up, the parent has promised to take the kid to an awesome water park if they attempt to load the dishwasher. The kid has never been to the water park and doesn't know if it will be fun, but their parent promises it will be fun. It's their choice and if they don't load the dishwasher, they just don't get to go. Some kids would decide to try to load the dishwasher and others wouldn't be persuaded. So you could say it was a punishment not to go, or you could say it was reward to go. Wouldn't both be right? If the kid doesn't load the dishwasher, it doesn't make the parent love the kid any less, or make the parent not want to take the kid to the water park though, does it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not going to a water park is infinitely different than burning in hell for eternity. They aren't even in the same universe, by comparison.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, that metaphore sucks, how about. The parent promises to take the kid to the water park if he loads the dishwasher, as you say, (reward in heaven). If he does not even try he locks the child overnight in the cold in his bathing suit (punishment in hell with the hot exchanged for the cold). It is both the old stick and carrot method. If you make a metaphore try to have it make sense in the Biblical context. I mean unless you are a Jehovah's Witness, they don't beleave in hell, in that case it works, or if you are a Mormon. It really does not hold water with the traditional interpritation of the Bible

      Delete
  7. Except for there's no proof that the water park even exists.

    ReplyDelete