The Most Beautiful Piece Of Music Ever...
Music7 mins ago
Who did the devil kill in the bible?
126 Answers
Apparently in the bible god killed an abundance of people and the devil only killed two or three. Obviously there's no way of getting through all of god's murders as there would be too many to mention here, but was a record kept of the devil's victims?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by flobadob. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Mike - “... Birdie, when it comes to kissing arse this is as good as it gets. Don't push your luck!...”
I asked you to admit that you were entirely wrong about me attempting to ban posts. You have done so. I then asked you to explain how you arrived at your erroneous opinion. You haven't elaborated.
You then say that you never apologise and you then apologise. When I comment on your obvious contradiction you tell me to 'not push my luck' and that you're now 'kissing Yabbie'.
Seriously Mike, what are you talking about? No one is asking you to kiss anything. All I wanted to demonstrate to everyone reading is (a) I have never asked for a post to be removed from AB; and (b) you are a liar.
I understand that you are a Christian? How then do you reconcile your Christian beliefs with starting your participation in this thread by unnecessarily and overtly insulting a member of AB and then knowingly telling lies about another?
I'm not being facetious. I really want to know.
I asked you to admit that you were entirely wrong about me attempting to ban posts. You have done so. I then asked you to explain how you arrived at your erroneous opinion. You haven't elaborated.
You then say that you never apologise and you then apologise. When I comment on your obvious contradiction you tell me to 'not push my luck' and that you're now 'kissing Yabbie'.
Seriously Mike, what are you talking about? No one is asking you to kiss anything. All I wanted to demonstrate to everyone reading is (a) I have never asked for a post to be removed from AB; and (b) you are a liar.
I understand that you are a Christian? How then do you reconcile your Christian beliefs with starting your participation in this thread by unnecessarily and overtly insulting a member of AB and then knowingly telling lies about another?
I'm not being facetious. I really want to know.
LG, //Argostran offers a lovely get out of jail card for god……Why doesn't he take these bloodthirsty evangelists to one side and show them the error of their ways?//
Free will would be the answer to that one. It always is. I recently asked a Christian how, morally, he can accept, without the slightest protest, firstly that an innocent man was tortured and executed in order to allow for the sins of people like him to be forgiven, and secondly how he can accept, without the slightest protest, that a non-believer, albeit a good man, can be doomed to eternal damnation simply for the crime of analysing the available information and recognising and acknowledging the glaring flaws and inconsistencies? Both these questions demonstrate the utter injustice and spiteful brutality of his God’s world. The Christian failed miserably to answer the first question, and his response to the second was, quite astonishingly, ‘God can’t do anything about it. He gave man free will’.
In effect, this Christian simply doesn’t see the immorality in one man being compelled to suffer and die, through no fault of his own, for the failings of others – and neither does he see that free will means the freedom to choose – something which, if the wrong choice carries a penalty, is not freedom at all.
As for ‘God can’t do anything about it’, again God is off the hook. He’s God – allegedly omnipotent – but he can’t do anything about it? How does that work then? If God can’t change his mind, then he can’t be omnipotent. Perhaps someone will enlighten me.
Free will would be the answer to that one. It always is. I recently asked a Christian how, morally, he can accept, without the slightest protest, firstly that an innocent man was tortured and executed in order to allow for the sins of people like him to be forgiven, and secondly how he can accept, without the slightest protest, that a non-believer, albeit a good man, can be doomed to eternal damnation simply for the crime of analysing the available information and recognising and acknowledging the glaring flaws and inconsistencies? Both these questions demonstrate the utter injustice and spiteful brutality of his God’s world. The Christian failed miserably to answer the first question, and his response to the second was, quite astonishingly, ‘God can’t do anything about it. He gave man free will’.
In effect, this Christian simply doesn’t see the immorality in one man being compelled to suffer and die, through no fault of his own, for the failings of others – and neither does he see that free will means the freedom to choose – something which, if the wrong choice carries a penalty, is not freedom at all.
As for ‘God can’t do anything about it’, again God is off the hook. He’s God – allegedly omnipotent – but he can’t do anything about it? How does that work then? If God can’t change his mind, then he can’t be omnipotent. Perhaps someone will enlighten me.
Flob, //It made reference to the fact that the story of Jesus can be found in other forms throughout history.//
That’s true – history, pre-Jesus, abounds with tales of miraculous births, of virgins being impregnated by gods – and of some of the products of those births subsequently rising from the dead – and in one instance, at least, after three days.
In Jesus case, however, we really need to evaluate the available information thoroughly, because the question of why the gospel writers felt it necessary to include his genealogy through Joseph’s line arises. Like much of the bible, the accounts are conflicting – probably because the early Christian church tampered with the text relentlessly in order to make it fit its agenda and made a few mistakes in the process - but nevertheless, if God fathered Jesus, then Joseph’s family line must be irrelevant to the story. However, if God did not father Jesus, then in order to attempt to attempt to determine who Jesus really was, and the truth of what really happened, Joseph’s genealogy is paramount.
That’s true – history, pre-Jesus, abounds with tales of miraculous births, of virgins being impregnated by gods – and of some of the products of those births subsequently rising from the dead – and in one instance, at least, after three days.
In Jesus case, however, we really need to evaluate the available information thoroughly, because the question of why the gospel writers felt it necessary to include his genealogy through Joseph’s line arises. Like much of the bible, the accounts are conflicting – probably because the early Christian church tampered with the text relentlessly in order to make it fit its agenda and made a few mistakes in the process - but nevertheless, if God fathered Jesus, then Joseph’s family line must be irrelevant to the story. However, if God did not father Jesus, then in order to attempt to attempt to determine who Jesus really was, and the truth of what really happened, Joseph’s genealogy is paramount.
methyl //The Bible itself is a good collection of anecdotes designed to give moral example to people in their day-to-day lives and to record the history of the Jewish people.//
Which is it for the Hebrew massacres under Joshua? Moral example or record of history. Or both? Since the Hebrews were God's Chosen Race and they were massacring those whom God didn't like in His name, I assume they were being upstanding examples of morality too.
Should I get some friends together and go out and put whole societies to the sword because they disagree with God? It seems that many modern Biblical adherents have trouble deciding this matter.
Which is it for the Hebrew massacres under Joshua? Moral example or record of history. Or both? Since the Hebrews were God's Chosen Race and they were massacring those whom God didn't like in His name, I assume they were being upstanding examples of morality too.
Should I get some friends together and go out and put whole societies to the sword because they disagree with God? It seems that many modern Biblical adherents have trouble deciding this matter.
Wildwood, I presume you mean this?
//So god kills people for doing 'devil stuff', fine, all fear god. But why would the devil kill people? For doing 'god stuff' - possibly but not exactly the message they want to put out I shouldn't imagine, don't want to have people fearing the devil as well now do we, might confuse them.//
…. in which case, people do fear the devil. That same Christian I spoke of told me the devil tempts people to do wrong – so I assume that means the Christian clings to God in the knowledge that he is not obliged to take responsibility for his own actions, and will be forgiven for succumbing to temptation because it’s always someone else’s fault – the devil’s. Three Hail Marys – or if you’re not into Hail Marys, a quick prayer - and you’re off the hook. Simple. ;o)
//So god kills people for doing 'devil stuff', fine, all fear god. But why would the devil kill people? For doing 'god stuff' - possibly but not exactly the message they want to put out I shouldn't imagine, don't want to have people fearing the devil as well now do we, might confuse them.//
…. in which case, people do fear the devil. That same Christian I spoke of told me the devil tempts people to do wrong – so I assume that means the Christian clings to God in the knowledge that he is not obliged to take responsibility for his own actions, and will be forgiven for succumbing to temptation because it’s always someone else’s fault – the devil’s. Three Hail Marys – or if you’re not into Hail Marys, a quick prayer - and you’re off the hook. Simple. ;o)
Just in case anyone is not absolutely clear as to what an astrological age is, the following link from Wiki may help your understanding of this arcane and little understood (even by it's aderents) subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrological_age
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrological_age
Hi Naomi - I've just come back to this question - I'll try and make some more points.
Do not underestimate the negative aspects of free will. If a person or organisation kills people and says it's in the name of God , you know for definite that it is not in the name of God it is in the name of their own political organisation , religious or otherwise - I am absolutely unmoved on that .
Naomi I for one have never accepted that a non-believer is doomed to eternal damnation .
Why doesn't God do something about it ? -there is physical geological evidence and archaeological evidence that a sudden and massive flood took place -there are many youtube clips about it discovery channel etc . Modern historians now think this took place 8000 (rather than 5000) years ago . The story appears in many ancient writings across the globe including the Bible.(I dislike mentioning the bible on this one because people will immediately say that I believe the legend of Noah's Ark and that all the species were squeezed on board the ark etc . - I don't believe that) I am referring to physical evidence for the flood , not historical legends about how the flood was survived . That flood will have killed many many people . (The survivors will have been the ones who lived on the higher ground - the plains of Africa etc.)
The flood was survived and that leads me to my last point about the omnipotence of God . Naomi human beings are not the only life form God created , humans are just a fraction of it - insects , plants and many others were here long before us and will be here long after we've gone .If one of the species of the earth embarks upon a destructive course of action which results in killing most of that species other life forms would deal with it . Insects and bacteria would deal with the rotting corpses and plants would deal with the increase in carbon dioxide , all over a period of time . The small number of humans who manage to survive would eventually emerge to a newly cleansed earth - and life would go on . Therein lies the omnipotence of God .
I'm sure people will shoot holes in this answer and I look forward to reading some of the replies but I won't post another answer because I've said all I can and I would just be repeating myself .
Do not underestimate the negative aspects of free will. If a person or organisation kills people and says it's in the name of God , you know for definite that it is not in the name of God it is in the name of their own political organisation , religious or otherwise - I am absolutely unmoved on that .
Naomi I for one have never accepted that a non-believer is doomed to eternal damnation .
Why doesn't God do something about it ? -there is physical geological evidence and archaeological evidence that a sudden and massive flood took place -there are many youtube clips about it discovery channel etc . Modern historians now think this took place 8000 (rather than 5000) years ago . The story appears in many ancient writings across the globe including the Bible.(I dislike mentioning the bible on this one because people will immediately say that I believe the legend of Noah's Ark and that all the species were squeezed on board the ark etc . - I don't believe that) I am referring to physical evidence for the flood , not historical legends about how the flood was survived . That flood will have killed many many people . (The survivors will have been the ones who lived on the higher ground - the plains of Africa etc.)
The flood was survived and that leads me to my last point about the omnipotence of God . Naomi human beings are not the only life form God created , humans are just a fraction of it - insects , plants and many others were here long before us and will be here long after we've gone .If one of the species of the earth embarks upon a destructive course of action which results in killing most of that species other life forms would deal with it . Insects and bacteria would deal with the rotting corpses and plants would deal with the increase in carbon dioxide , all over a period of time . The small number of humans who manage to survive would eventually emerge to a newly cleansed earth - and life would go on . Therein lies the omnipotence of God .
I'm sure people will shoot holes in this answer and I look forward to reading some of the replies but I won't post another answer because I've said all I can and I would just be repeating myself .
Naomi:- //…. in which case, people do fear the devil. That same Christian I spoke of told me the devil tempts people to do wrong //
So in fact people not actually fear the devil, they just fear what God will think (and quite possibly 'do') about them doing 'devil stuff'. Because, as is becoming apparent, you are much more likely to be killed by God than by the devil. And, even if you did get killed indirectly by the devil - by somebody else doing 'devil stuff' - then surely this could only happen if God allowed it to happen, thereby you were actually killed by God (again).
Applying logic to religion, it's the way forward.
So in fact people not actually fear the devil, they just fear what God will think (and quite possibly 'do') about them doing 'devil stuff'. Because, as is becoming apparent, you are much more likely to be killed by God than by the devil. And, even if you did get killed indirectly by the devil - by somebody else doing 'devil stuff' - then surely this could only happen if God allowed it to happen, thereby you were actually killed by God (again).
Applying logic to religion, it's the way forward.
<<I know he caused the Gadarine swine to drown>>
Devils were the proximate cause of their death, but it was Jesus' exorcism which freed them from the demoniac and it was He who granted them permission to possess the pigs. So in the interest of honest accounting we have to ascribe another 2000 deaths (albeit only porcine ones) to God.
Devils were the proximate cause of their death, but it was Jesus' exorcism which freed them from the demoniac and it was He who granted them permission to possess the pigs. So in the interest of honest accounting we have to ascribe another 2000 deaths (albeit only porcine ones) to God.
The mistake many make is to see God as a benign, kind-hearted, old chap. I believe he may be more like Loki from Norse mythology than we may care, or dare, to think.
Imagine a wealthy pork farmer with more than 2000 beasts. You'd think that wealth and contentment would bless him all his days. Not so. First he is possessed by daemons. And then as a consequence of his cure they enter his beasts and drive them to a watery end.
One minute he's immensely wealthy but possessed, the next as sane as you or I, but in penury.
Even Job might despair at such treatment.
Imagine a wealthy pork farmer with more than 2000 beasts. You'd think that wealth and contentment would bless him all his days. Not so. First he is possessed by daemons. And then as a consequence of his cure they enter his beasts and drive them to a watery end.
One minute he's immensely wealthy but possessed, the next as sane as you or I, but in penury.
Even Job might despair at such treatment.
Argorstran - “... there is physical geological evidence and archaeological evidence that a sudden and massive flood took place -there are many youtube clips about it discovery channel etc . Modern historians now think this took place 8000 (rather than 5000) years ago...”
There really isn't you know. I'm afraid you've been mislead.
I don't deny that many documentaries have been made that suggest or even conclude that a global flood actually happened. However there are few, if any, credible geologists, archaeologists, paleontologists, etc. who agree with the theory of a global flood occurring in the time-frame you mention.
There are many reasons to conclude that a global flood didn't happen. Have a look at the theories on geological erosion and the fossil record described by paleontology. Both of these scientific disciplines overtly refute the global flood theory.
There really isn't you know. I'm afraid you've been mislead.
I don't deny that many documentaries have been made that suggest or even conclude that a global flood actually happened. However there are few, if any, credible geologists, archaeologists, paleontologists, etc. who agree with the theory of a global flood occurring in the time-frame you mention.
There are many reasons to conclude that a global flood didn't happen. Have a look at the theories on geological erosion and the fossil record described by paleontology. Both of these scientific disciplines overtly refute the global flood theory.
Latest Posts
What's The Issue With Self Service?
News12 mins ago
Why Are Oxbridge Students Now Terrorist...
News20 mins ago
Body & Soul36 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.