Are God and Satan allies?

[Claire Evans]

We have the story of Job:

"One day when the sons of God came before Jehovah, Satan came with them. Jehovah said to Satan, "From where do you come?" Satan answered, "From going back and forth on the earth, and walking up and down on it." And Jehovah said to Satan, "Have you seen my servant Job? For there is no man like him on the ea rth, blameless and upright, who reveres God and avoids evil." Satan answered, "But is it for nothing that Job reveres God? Have you not yourself made a hedge all about him, about his household, and about all that he has? You have blessed whatever he does, and his possessions have greatly increased. But just put out your hand now and take away all he has; he certainly will curse you to your face." Then Jehovah said to Satan, "See, everything that he has is in your power; only do not lay hands on Job himself." So Satan left the presence of Jehovah."

Clearly Satan and God are allies in this story.

Then we have Jesus who said in John 8:44

"You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

Clearly Jesus is not being portrayed as being an ally of Satan. If they were, God would be giving Satan the power to deceive because that is what He would have wanted. This is not in accordance with the gospels. The Lord's Prayer goes, "Lead us not into temptation and deliver us from evil."

This means that God would never use Satan to tempt us and will not purposely put evil in our way because Jesus is asking Him to deliver us from evil.

How do we reconcile this? It's clear that it's because Jews do not believe the devil is evil. To Jews, he is merely a "prosecuting attorney", there only to make people's lives miserable to lead us to God.
We also know that Satan is an omniscient being who is omnipresent. Yet Jews reject this outright. They see that as a negation of monotheism.

There is a incongruity between the Satan in the New Testament and Satan in the OT. Is it because the God in the OT is not the Father of Jesus?

[Divine Insight]

How do we reconcile this?

It seems to me that the reconciliation is quite simple. We simply recognize that the Biblical stories are nothing more than inconsistent man-made rumors.

The problem seems to lie with the subject of "Theology". Unlike all other intellectual pursuits, Theology refuses to allow any solutions that do not embrace the conclusion (or presumption) that the Biblical stories actually represent some God and therefore must be justified at all cost.

I agree that there are grave inconsistencies concerning the concept of Satan. In Job Satan appears to be in total harmony with God, asking for God's permission before doing anything. That is hardly the behavior of a supposed fallen angel who refuses to obey God, or wants to take over God's authority.

There are other problems too that you may not have noticed. In the Garden of Eden the Serpent who beguiled Eve was Satan himself (I'll address how we know this in a moment). Yet God supposedly cursed Satan to crawl on his belly and eat dirt. Yet, that curse doesn't seem to have slowed Satan down at all. And in the story of Job Satan seems to be quite active and powerful for someone who is supposed to be crawling around on his belly eating dirt.

And now to address how we know that Serpent in the Garden of Eden was Satan:

It's basically says so in the New Testament Book of Revelation:

Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Sure sounds to me like the old serpent in the Garden of Eden that decieveth the whole world through his beguiling of Eve.

I'm quite sure that many Christians will argue that this isn't reverencing the serpent in the Garden of Eden, as I've heard many reject this interpretation. But for me personally it's the only reference that makes any sense. What other serpent is there in the entire Biblical Canon that this verse could be referring to?

I just don't see where there are any plausible alternatives.

In any case, my resolution to these kinds of problems is to conclude that it's just a collection of very poorly written superstitious religious folklore. That would certainly explain all the inconsistencies and self-contradictions.

Of course that would get me kicked out of a school of "Theology" because I refuse to play by the rules and only offer "solutions" that are consistent with the Biblical Dogma actually being the "Word of God".

But as I say, what other intellectual discipline or subject of study demands that only answers that assume a particular conclusion are permitted? Doesn't that put the conclusion ahead of the questions?

I can't justify these stories, so I guess I'm not a very good "Theologian".

It would also seem to me that even if we allow the story of Job to be a real description of "God" then we have a God who actually gives Satan his permission to do evil things to people. I'm not so sure that resolves the problem anyway.

This would also bring up the question of whether something very similar happened with Adam and Eve? Did Satan go to God prior to beguiling Eve and make the same sort of proposition with God?

And if so, then why would God feel compelled to curse Satan to crawl on his belly and eat dirt for the rest of his days if God himself had already given Satan permission to beguile Eve?

This whole religious paradigm just seems to be a can of worms that's impossible to justify. The conclusion that it's just poorly made up superstitious tales seems to be the only rational solution.

Just my thoughts for whatever they are worth.

[Monta]

[Replying to Claire Evans]

"We also know that Satan is an omniscient being who is omnipresent. Yet Jews reject this outright. They see that as a negation of monotheism."

**Where do yu get the idea that satan is omnicient being? Satan has respect to falsities, devil to evils; therefore we are all devils and satans at times. When Jesus said, you are of your father the devil, he meant to say you do evil.

There's no way that Jehovah would have spent time speaking with satan as in Job.
Why would Light need to speak with Darkness? Why would Good need to communicate with Evil?

"There is a incongruity between the Satan in the New Testament and Satan in the OT. Is it because the God in the OT is not the Father of Jesus?"

**Not really, it's only how we understand it.
Have no idea how the last sentance fits in please elaborate.

[Divine Insight]

There's no way that Jehovah would have spent time speaking with satan as in Job.
Why would Light need to speak with Darkness? Why would Good need to communicate with Evil?

Are you suggesting that the story of Job should be rejected from the Biblical canon?

I always love it when we toss stuff out.

[Monta]

There's no way that Jehovah would have spent time speaking with satan as in Job.
Why would Light need to speak with Darkness? Why would Good need to communicate with Evil?

Are you suggesting that the story of Job should be rejected from the Biblical canon?

I always love it when we toss stuff out.

Certainly not. It either has somwething to tell us or it makes us think.

[Claire Evans]

How do we reconcile this?

It seems to me that the reconciliation is quite simple. We simply recognize that the Biblical stories are nothing more than inconsistent man-made rumors.

The problem seems to lie with the subject of "Theology". Unlike all other intellectual pursuits, Theology refuses to allow any solutions that do not embrace the conclusion (or presumption) that the Biblical stories actually represent some God and therefore must be justified at all cost.

It's true. They will justify it at all costs. I've recently been banned from a fundamentalist site for challenging the scriptures. Too many of my posts were reported, including this one which I posted there as well.

I agree that there are grave inconsistencies concerning the concept of Satan. In Job Satan appears to be in total harmony with God, asking for God's permission before doing anything. That is hardly the behavior of a supposed fallen angel who refuses to obey God, or wants to take over God's authority.

There are other problems too that you may not have noticed. In the Garden of Eden the Serpent who beguiled Eve was Satan himself (I'll address how we know this in a moment). Yet God supposedly cursed Satan to crawl on his belly and eat dirt. Yet, that curse doesn't seem to have slowed Satan down at all. And in the story of Job Satan seems to be quite active and powerful for someone who is supposed to be crawling around on his belly eating dirt.

And now to address how we know that Serpent in the Garden of Eden was Satan:

It's basically says so in the New Testament Book of Revelation:

Revelation 12:9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.

Sure sounds to me like the old serpent in the Garden of Eden that decieveth the whole world through his beguiling of Eve.

I'm quite sure that many Christians will argue that this isn't reverencing the serpent in the Garden of Eden, as I've heard many reject this interpretation. But for me personally it's the only reference that makes any sense. What other serpent is there in the entire Biblical Canon that this verse could be referring to?



I just don't see where there are any plausible alternatives.

In any case, my resolution to these kinds of problems is to conclude that it's just a collection of very poorly written superstitious religious folklore. That would certainly explain all the inconsistencies and self-contradictions.



Of course that would get me kicked out of a school of "Theology" because I refuse to play by the rules and only offer "solutions" that are consistent with the Biblical Dogma actually being the "Word of God".

But as I say, what other intellectual discipline or subject of study demands that only answers that assume a particular conclusion are permitted? Doesn't that put the conclusion ahead of the questions?

I can't justify these stories, so I guess I'm not a very good "Theologian".

That's confirmation bias. I ask, "Why is it such a threat to you to even entertain the idea there is corruption in the Bible?" Any deception in the Bible or error, they believe, will undermine God's power. It will make their world implode. People like feeling safe. They like going with what they are familiar with. And woe to the person who tries to break their bubble!

It would also seem to me that even if we allow the story of Job to be a real description of "God" then we have a God who actually gives Satan his permission to do evil things to people. I'm not so sure that resolves the problem anyway.

It doesn't explain how God is meant to be benevolent if that is the case. God giving permission to torment someone to make them come to them is like a me being a introducing my friend to drugs, giving permission to a drug dealer to sell drugs to her, her getting addicted and then me offering her rehab so that she can see me as her saviour.

This would also bring up the question of whether something very similar happened with Adam and Eve? Did Satan go to God prior to beguiling Eve and make the same sort of proposition with God?

And if so, then why would God feel compelled to curse Satan to crawl on his belly and eat dirt for the rest of his days if God himself had already given Satan permission to beguile Eve?

This whole religious paradigm just seems to be a can of worms that's impossible to justify. The conclusion that it's just poorly made up superstitious tales seems to be the only rational solution.

Just my thoughts for whatever they are worth.

It makes sense when one realizes that this story is not a Hebrew story. It's Sumerian.


Enki and Enlil were offspring of the Annunaki. There was a great amount of friction between them.
This was originally the symbol for the Anunnaki-Sirian creator god, EA, or EN.KI (who has become an Archetype), was the chief of the magicians, "the one who knows," and infamous for being the serpent of the Garden of Eden who created lifeforms in test tubes half a million years ago with his half-sister Ninharsag, at the suggestion of his son, Marduk, to create humans to be the workers for the gods. (The symbol is also based upon the winged globe for the planet Nibiru, the symbol of the royal Anunnaki family.)

In the Garden of Eden situation, Enlil was furious that Enki permitted humans to have access to knowledge, the mixing of the Anunnaki with human genes, thereby becoming more "godly," and equal to the Anunnaki. To strike back at Enki, and in the attempt to regain his power over humans, Enlil vowed to tarnish Enkis reputation by spreading the idea that the serpent of wisdom was evil. Enlil tried to wipe out knowledge of the DNA coding Enki gave humans, and of what the Anunnaki used in order to have longevity (gold).

The Garden of Eden, by the way, was a literal place, but also a genetic metaphor.

Enki knew had Adam (Adapa) eaten from the other tree, it would not ensure wisdom or spiritual evolution. Instead, it would more likely result in primitive human living for eons without evolution. The story of this translated from the ancient Babylonian texts is very interesting with Adapas confusion over whom to believe, which to eat. It resulted in him eating "the wrong" thing, but actually it was the right thing, in terms of DNA, which would eventually bring our spirituality back from whence it faltered, and remind people to tend to the Earth, which was not created by extraterrestrials, but by God.


Luciferians tend to believe Enki was the good god who liberated mankind with wisdom withheld by his evil brother Enlil. In Genesis, it tends to be the other way round. God, who withheld knowledge, was the good god and the serpent was the evil one who wanted to tempt Adam and Eve.

Enki was represented as a serpent and had healing powers. This is where we get the medical serpent.



Interestingly enough, Moses held up a brazen serpent and whoever looked at it would be healed. We can see that the Bible appears to be in agreement with the Luciferian beliefs that Enki is the good guy.

Not only was Enki represented as a serpent, but a winged one at that.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sumer ... naki07.htm

This is the result of Hebrews being nomads:

"The Hebrews as nomadic tribes, and later as tradesmen, were always on the move all over the Fertile Crescent that was bounded to the west by Egypt and to the east by Sumer and Babylon (Mesopotamia). Their constant journeys gave them access to the famous epics and stories/myths of the ancient Near East.



It was only after the Babylonian Captivity that the Rabbis had thought of writing down their oral teachings. Contrary to the Israelite gloomy depiction of the Captivity, this deportation had been an enlightening experience for the ancient Israelites. Those herds of Israelite Bedouins for the first time had an encounter with a superior urban civilization. The Babylonians had settled communities with a unique culture, .e.g., art, architecture, theology and mythology.
This is when the Hebrew scribes, by default or by design, had incorporated many of the ancient Sumerian and Assyrian mythology and blended them into their new book."


https://ashraf62.wordpress.com/2012/08/ ... onotheism/

The incongruities are there because the OT was influenced by Sumerian stories and the New Testament was not.


Thanks for your refreshing comments.

[postroad]

Make of it what you will. Parallel accounts of the same story.

2 Samuel 24:1

[ David Enrolls the Fighting Men ] Again the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, Go and take a census of Israel and Judah.



1 Chronicles 21:1

[ David Counts the Fighting Men ] Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel.

[2timothy316]

More like a prosecutor [Satan] and a defendant [Jehovah] in front of a jury [assembly of angels].

Read closely the account in Job, particularly the following accusations, "But is it for nothing that Job reveres God? Have you not yourself made a hedge all about him, about his household, and about all that he has? You have blessed whatever he does, and his possessions have greatly increased. But just put out your hand now and take away all he has; he certainly will curse you to your face."

These are accusations that Satan wanted answered. Satan wants them answered in the court of public opinion. Why else wait to bring it up during a day 'the sons of God came before Jehovah'? Certainly Satan wanted Job to fail. Jehovah on the other hand had complete faith Job would do the right think. So allies? Hardly! More like bitter rivals. Rivals where Jehovah and Job came out victorious and Satan lost. If they were allies then all parties would have been winners, don't you think? But Satan was proven completely wrong in the case of Job. This is just one of Satan's many attempts to prove Jehovah as a bad ruler. Satan trying to make a case that men only love God because of the blessings they receive and not because of true love.

It does raise an interesting question though for all of us. Do we only love God for the good He provides? Do we still love Him even when faced with horrible attacks on us by others? When we do come under attack, where do we turn? To ourselves? Other people? Who do we blame? That question is alive and well today and still be being answered every minute of every day somewhere in the world. "Be wise, my son, and make my heart rejoice, so that I can make a reply to him who taunts me."Prov. 27:11.

The Job account teaches me that how Satan treated Job is how Satan rules and leads. Through fear and threats. Jehovah rules with blessings, protection and rewards. Satan's reward for Job doing what he wanted him to in cursing God was death. (Job 2:9) Jehovah's reward was extended life, health, more children and more riches than before. If Satan had never made the accusation, there would be Job account in the Bible and Job would've been unknown to us. Living out his days in peace and happiness.

So again, allies? No way!

[Divine Insight]

2timothy316, I'm going to reply to some of the apologies you've given only for the purpose of explaining why I don't find them to be compelling. I've also heard all of these apologies before so these are pretty standard apologies.

These are accusations that Satan wanted answered. Satan wants them answered in the court of public opinion.

So why should an omnipotent God give a hoot what Satan wants? And especially why should the Biblical God feel a need to justify himself in a court of public opinion?

I don't buy into these apologies because they suggest that this God feels that he needs to defend himself against these accusations made by Satan. And I would also suggest that, at least IMHO, for this God to attempt to justify himself in public opinion at the expense of Job, his family, and servants would be immoral on behalf of God.

And besides, isn't this the same God who refuses to allow people to tempt him?

Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

Yet this is exactly what you are proposing here. Satan is tempting God to prove himself in a court of public opinion. This would be a God who needs to ANSWER to Satan in an attempt to justify himself in court of public opinion.

Satan trying to make a case that men only love God because of the blessings they receive and not because of true love.

I hole that this makes no sense either. Why would you love a God who has absolutely nothing to offer you? If that were the case then why shouldn't you also be loving Satan?

It does raise an interesting question though for all of us. Do we only love God for the good He provides?

That's the only reason anyone should love a God. What other reason could you possibly have? Would you love a God who constantly does bad things to you?

Most people love the abstract idea of a "God" precisely because that very concept is supposed to represent all that is GOOD. In fact, an Evil "God" would hardly be a God in any case, since we already have a name for an Evil Entity, and that would be a Devil, or Demon. And the reason we don't love evil demons is precisely because they are NOT GOOD, and represent all that is BAD.

I hold that anyone who claims to love a "God" for no reason at all isn't making any sense at all. It would seem to me that the only reason they would even make such a claim is because they feel that it's important to love their particular God for no reason at all becasue if they had any reason at all, then they would be in love with that reason instead of the God.

But the fact of the matter is that a reason is required to love anyone. Even if the only reason you love them is because you take pity on them and would hope that they could be cured of all the reasons you don't truly love them for who they currently are.

The Job account teaches me that how Satan treated Job is how Satan rules and leads. Through fear and threats. Jehovah rules with blessings, protection and rewards. Satan's reward for Job doing what he wanted him to in cursing God was death. (Job 2:9) Jehovah's reward was extended life, health, more children and more riches than before. If Satan had never made the accusation, there would be Job account in the Bible and Job would've been unknown to us. Living out his days in peace and happiness.

So again, allies? No way!

In the meantime, Job's entirely family and servants were collateral damage in this game that God played with Satan. So even if I accept your apologies for this story I still see a God who would potentially have me destroyed as "collateral damage" just to make a point about someone else.

Also, look what you have just done! You have just stated that Job's REWARD from Jehovah was extended life, health, more children and more riches than before. This brings up the question of why we should love this God again. Apparently you seem to feel that it's because, in the end, we can always expect this God to do really nice things for us in great abundance.

But what if God allowed Job to continue to live in the pain and sickness that had been inflicted upon him until he finally died? According to you Job should LOVE this God anyway, because according to you we are supposed to love this God regardless of how he might treat us.

Why should we love a God who isn't going to reward us for good behavior.

And why should anyone love a God if they aren't even going to be rewarded for having loved the God? Why exactly are they loving an entity who would ultimately do harm to them.

What's the point behind supposedly loving a God who has nothing to offer you but suffering and death?

The bulk of Christians love Jesus precisely because Jesus offers them eternal life in paradise. They certainly wouldn't love him if he was just going to condemn everyone to everlasting punishment for not good reason. That's what Satan supposedly does, and everyone hates Satan. If Satan was offering a loving paradise in eternal life and people could TRUST this offer then they would be in love with Satan.

All they want is the eternal life in paradise. They don't really care who's making the offer. As long as they are convinced the offer can be TRUSTED they'll gladly accept it. After all, the only reason the love Jesus is because they have been convinced that he can be TRUSTED to keep his promises, even though he clearly hasn't kept any that he is actually cited as having made in the Gospels.

In fact, I've heard many Christian theist claim that they love God because they know they can trust God. So there you have it, what they really love is the idea that there is someone they can trust. And no doubt what they actually trust God to do is to be very kind and benevolent to them, showing them with eternal gifts beyond their wildest dreams.

I doubt that there exists too many Christian Theists who actually think they will go to heaven and have to work at some horrible back-breaking job in hideous conditions for the rest of eternity. That would be more like something they would associate with Hell.

So ultimately what they trust in God for, is for GOOD REWARDS. And that's ultimately the idea they are in love with.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 9 by Divine Insight]

As I said, there are those that vilify God, have already prejudged him and only care about themselves and what God can do or doesn't do for them. There are those don't see the bigger picture. There are those that Satan as won over and successfully gotten those people to curse God.

If you don't buy it, I'm not surprised. Satan, without trust in the Bible can be convincing. However, I don't think you realize like so many that don't buy it, the tone of your reply is very much like the tone of Satan's accusations. Your reply even riddled with questions like Satan's accusations. Asking 'why of this of you God? Why don't you do this God'? Meanwhile any meaningful answer you hear is shut down because it's not what you want to hear. Jehovah as already been judged as a failure by you.

I'd reply more to you but it would be a waste of time. After you have concluded...

So ultimately what they trust in God for, is for GOOD REWARDS. And that's ultimately the idea they are in love with.

That's Satan's whole argument and apparently you agree thus Job along with anyone else that loves God even without His blessings are fools. One other thing, not only for God not to bless His loyal ones would be unfair to His loyal ones, that's the minor issue, but larger issue is that it would undermine His own sovereignty. That's the issue you're missing. It's not about how selfish humans can be but does God have the right to rule. Has God made a bunch of spoiled brats? Sounds like to me you think He has.