If you were Satan....

[Athetotheist]

I remember a TV preacher once asking his broadcast audience, "If you were Satan....." I don't remember the rest of the question, but I seem to remember that he was talking about prophecy and arguing that Satan was up to some diabolical mischief ("If you were Satan, isn't that what you would do?").

A lot of detail in Christian scripture about what is to happen before Jesus returns is tied to the activity of "Satan". The appearance of the "antichrist", in particular, is supposed to be part of Satan's last gambit before he goes down to utter defeat.

Since it was asked of me how I would react if I were Satan, I think it's fair for me to answer. I know that "Satan" is supposed to be a being of superhuman intelligence, but I can't help thinking that if such a being actually existed and if I were that being, I could do a lot better.

If I were "Satan", I would scrap the antichrist plan. If it's all laid out in the Bible, then everyone knows what to expect and you've lost the element of surprise. With that one simple deviation from the prophetic scenario, the whole thing would be gummed up. No antichrist, no mark of the beast, no abomination of desolation, no anything I was supposed to do as Satan to set the stage for the return of Jesus. And without those prophetic components in place, Jesus couldn't return to fulfill prophecy. And how could anyone stop me? I wouldn't be taking some action which could be prevented; I would be defeating prophecy by not taking action.

So let me pass the preacher's question on to you. If you were "Satan", what would you do----or not do----to thwart prophecy?

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to The Nice Centurion in post #69

Perhaps I tried to show that I find it rather improbable that Satan (thinks he) could win by nullifiing prophecy, (For: No fight, no win!)

No fight, default win.

You assume that !
But why is it realistic to state your assuming as a fact in this case ?

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to The Nice Centurion in post #69

Perhaps I tried to show that I find it rather improbable that Satan (thinks he) could win by nullifiing prophecy, (For: No fight, no win!)

No fight, default win.

You assume that !
But why is it realistic to state your assuming as a fact in this case ?

Because the fight is prophesied. No fight, prophecy fails.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #72]
No, that wouldnt make prophesy fail, for believers could always say: "The fight is yet to come!"

And if it were a prophetic fail, it were still no guaranteed win for Satan !

Yours is circular reasoning that doesnt even add up !

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #72]
No, that wouldnt make prophesy fail, for believers could always say: "The fight is yet to come!"

And as long as the fight was "yet to come", it would never come.

That wouldn't be the failure of prophecy? It wouldn't matter what believers say.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #74]
In this case christian foretelling would today have already failed, for didnt Jesus promise his second coming within the lifetime of some of his apostles.

The second coming is yet to come (pun unintended) is the straw they are so much grasping at, that they are believed even by you or else we wouldnt have this debate.

Of course all Mormons (and some evangelicals) believe that this must mean that some of the apostles are alive and kicking until today like the Three Nephites and as sure as The Bigfoot is Caine . . .

Makes the Patterson Bigfoot Video into a Patterson Caine Video!

Kind of makes one think, doesnt it?

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to The Nice Centurion in post #75

The second coming is yet to come (pun unintended) is the straw they are so much grasping at, that they are believed even by you or else we wouldnt have this debate.

I know why I'm having this debate. I'm asking questions about "Satan" as a means of arguing that the existence of such a being isn't a logical assumption.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to Athetotheist in post #76]
But you do it at the cost of yourself driving logic out of this debate!

Oh, and are you only against Satan or against christian Mythology as a whole?

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to The Nice Centurion in post #77

But you do it at the cost of yourself driving logic out of this debate!

How have I done so? By pointing out a logical course for "Satan" to take if he's the rebel he's supposed to be?

Oh, and are you only against Satan or against christian Mythology as a whole?

If something in a story falls apart, how much of the rest of the story will hang together?

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to The Nice Centurion in post #77

But you do it at the cost of yourself driving logic out of this debate!

How have I done so? By pointing out a logical course for "Satan" to take if he's the rebel he's supposed to be?

Of course not, but in your obsession to further your end (sucessfully arguing against all christian mythology), you blind yourself to my own arguments so much as like a Bigfoot fanatic does when he tries to prove Bigfoots existence in debate.

[Replying to The Nice Centurion in post #77

Oh, and are you only against Satan or against christian Mythology as a whole?

If something in a story falls apart, how much of the rest of the story will hang together?

That is like arguing against the existence of Captain America and the american way of life, by saying that the Red Skull acts irationally sometimes.
(He doesnt, of course. The Red Skull is a very stringent man.)

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to The Nice Centurion in post #79

in your obsession to further your end (sucessfully arguing against all christian mythology), you blind yourself to my own arguments so much as like a Bigfoot fanatic does when he tries to prove Bigfoots existence

Have I "blinded myself" to your arguments, or have I simply countered them? I think I've argued my case fairly successfully; is that an "obsession"?

That is like arguing against the existence of Captain America and the american way of life, by saying that the Red Skull acts irationally sometimes.
(He doesnt, of course. The Red Skull is a very stringent man.)

Your comparison between "Satan", a theological figure, and various comic book characters is, I believe, one of your arguments which I've successfully countered.