Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Willum
Savant
Posts: 9017
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
Has thanked: 35 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #1

Post by Willum »

Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?


Demand animal sacrifices.
Demand the Hebrew commit genocide for a cultural misunderstanding.
A demon would murder planets because he was having a tantrum.
When the Hebrew's generations were weakened by following it, had them undergo genocides themselves.
A demon would allow Adam and Eve to be corrupted, for reasons opaque. (Perfect beings not intending to sin, sinning.)
A demon would be defeated by a greater power (Satan) yet claim victory.
A demon would turn people to salt for looking back.
A demon would claim to love you, while sending most folks to Hell.
A demon would write a book saying he was good, omnipotent and full of all sorts of propaganda.
A demon would re-name itself "God," to capitalize on the conflation with the benevolence of deities.

...and so on.

Can anyone provide good reason to not suspect Yahweh is a demon?

User avatar
Miles
Savant
Posts: 5179
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 434 times
Been thanked: 1614 times

Re: Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #2

Post by Miles »

.

Heck, just the fact that he creates evil is demon enough for me:


Isaiah 45:7

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3484 times

Re: Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #3

Post by TRANSPONDER »

The Bible does make more sense to me if Satan is not God's adversary, but his GoFer. Ok, sometimes God does evil himself like the Flood or slaying the Midianites and for that matter imposing a birth on a girl who was engaged to someone else. And it's not necessarily God coming down like a shower of Gold on Danae but sending a messenger.

"Lie back and think of Judea." ..

"Galilee."

"Sorry, I thought for a minute this was Matthew."

It would make more sense if God was manifest as a demon, or a lot of Demons collectively regarded as satanic. They don't care about sending a load of demons into pigs to send them into the sea (aside that Gadara was across the river Yarmulk from the Sea of Galilee and Jerasa miles and miles inland) and nobody can doubt that Jesus is shown as having authority over Demons.

it would make more sense if Jesus did indeed throw out demons by the power of the master of Demons. The apologetic is that God leaves it all to Satan and does not intervene in the world..except when He does, all the time. Fact is that he could eliminate Satan and all his demons in an instant. That He does not implies that he doesn't wish to.

The Biblical arguments against that are as footling as most of them. 'How can Satan drive out Satan?' Easy, Because he takes his orders from God. There is no real difference between ordering Satan to depart and telling him to take some time off. And the analogy about a house divided is as bad as most of them. What about the parliamentary system? It works better when it is divided. It's when one party takes over entirely that the problems start. What about Catholic and Protestant? That division hasn't brought down Christianity.

No, Friends, you can rely on the Bible to bamboozle - if you let it.

And one may also guess that they know of this Elephant in the room; this demon waiting in the wings to leap onstage and whip off it's mask revealing Yahweh "It was me all the time!" or New Flanders' memorable appearance as a demon "It's always the one you least expect." Because in the end they have to resort to extreme sanction. "Anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven." Yes Folks, revealing that particular classified document is the one act that can't be excused.

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #4

Post by oldbadger »

Willum wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 7:19 pm Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?


Demand animal sacrifices.
Demand the Hebrew commit genocide for a cultural misunderstanding.
A demon would murder planets because he was having a tantrum.
When the Hebrew's generations were weakened by following it, had them undergo genocides themselves.
A demon would allow Adam and Eve to be corrupted, for reasons opaque. (Perfect beings not intending to sin, sinning.)
A demon would be defeated by a greater power (Satan) yet claim victory.
A demon would turn people to salt for looking back.
A demon would claim to love you, while sending most folks to Hell.
A demon would write a book saying he was good, omnipotent and full of all sorts of propaganda.
A demon would re-name itself "God," to capitalize on the conflation with the benevolence of deities.

...and so on.

Can anyone provide good reason to not suspect Yahweh is a demon?
Hello, and 'yes'...... one good reason coming up......

There are no demons, so it would be hard to find one.
However, there are no involved Gods, imo, so that could be a bit of a search as well.

The only God/Demon around here is Mother Nature who fulfils both rolls admirably.

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #5

Post by oldbadger »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 7:26 am The Bible does make more sense to me if Satan is not God's adversary, but his GoFer.
That sounds like Mother Nature, bounteous wonders together with hideous events and terrifying chaos.
No, Friends, you can rely on the Bible to bamboozle - if you let it.
Absolutely! The Bible can be a wonderful source of real events mixed up with theological waffle...... but I like it.
"Anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven." Yes Folks, revealing that particular classified document is the one act that can't be excused.
Really? Honest?....... Oh dear, I'm toast. But that doesn't matter because I believe in the resident governor around here, Mother Nature, so I'm toast anyway. So bring on the blasphemy! :)

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3484 times

Re: Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #6

Post by TRANSPONDER »

oldbadger wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 1:28 am
Willum wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 7:19 pm Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?


Demand animal sacrifices.
Demand the Hebrew commit genocide for a cultural misunderstanding.
A demon would murder planets because he was having a tantrum.
When the Hebrew's generations were weakened by following it, had them undergo genocides themselves.
A demon would allow Adam and Eve to be corrupted, for reasons opaque. (Perfect beings not intending to sin, sinning.)
A demon would be defeated by a greater power (Satan) yet claim victory.
A demon would turn people to salt for looking back.
A demon would claim to love you, while sending most folks to Hell.
A demon would write a book saying he was good, omnipotent and full of all sorts of propaganda.
A demon would re-name itself "God," to capitalize on the conflation with the benevolence of deities.

...and so on.

Can anyone provide good reason to not suspect Yahweh is a demon?
Hello, and 'yes'...... one good reason coming up......

There are no demons, so it would be hard to find one.
However, there are no involved Gods, imo, so that could be a bit of a search as well.

The only God/Demon around here is Mother Nature who fulfils both rolls admirably.
oldbadger wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 1:37 am
TRANSPONDER wrote: Wed May 18, 2022 7:26 am The Bible does make more sense to me if Satan is not God's adversary, but his GoFer.
That sounds like Mother Nature, bounteous wonders together with hideous events and terrifying chaos.
No, Friends, you can rely on the Bible to bamboozle - if you let it.
Absolutely! The Bible can be a wonderful source of real events mixed up with theological waffle...... but I like it.
"Anyone who blasphemes the Holy Spirit shall not be forgiven." Yes Folks, revealing that particular classified document is the one act that can't be excused.
Really? Honest?....... Oh dear, I'm toast. But that doesn't matter because I believe in the resident governor around here, Mother Nature, so I'm toast anyway. So bring on the blasphemy! :)
Yes, friends O:) I agree. On all the evidence there are no gods, the Holy Books are not true and religions are all man- made. But it is only by discussing these things as though the claims were hypothetically real that it becomes clear that they can't be.

We know that you can't genetically alter sheep by tying them to a striped stick. We know that illness isn't caused by demons. We just have to reason from the unarguably wrong to doubting the things that are wrong but the Bible -apologists try to excuse - the earth is not flat and the sun was not made later. The nativities can't both be true, and neither make sense. Then the prophecy of Tyre fails, the transfiguration is refuted by John and doubting Thomas refuted by Luke. Then the problems with the attempted murder at Nazareth, the penitent thief and the discrepant deaths of Judas look like things that are wrong, not eyewitness error.

Claims of Demons, prophecies and God sending dreams (the nonsensical one in Matthew's nativity should make that clear (1) have to be wrong. So the far -fetched excuses for contradictions are not believable, and not even the ones with reasonable excuses ('he misremebered...He didn't bother to mention that') look (under 'clean hands' practice) look non -credible. Then we remember that there is no Passover release custom, the Blasphemy charge makes no sense and neither does Herod jumping to the conclusion that a Royal birth means the scriptural messiah. That's when we should get the inkling of the story construction and how and why the gospels were fabricated. Demons, dreams and shekel -eating fishes are just the starting point. Once we know what the Gospels are Not, we can start to work out what they Are.

(1) Ok Joseph. Herod's dead, you can go back to Judea. Sorry...update, Herod's son is ruling so you'd better go to Galilee instead...where his Other son is Ruling. It's not just nonsense, but clearly a plot -device to explain why a Judean Family ended up as Galileans. For all that Luke has them as Galileans to start with.

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #7

Post by oldbadger »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 4:24 am Yes, friends O:) I agree. On all the evidence there are no gods, the Holy Books are not true and religions are all man- made. But it is only by discussing these things as though the claims were hypothetically real that it becomes clear that they can't be.

We know that you can't genetically alter sheep by tying them to a striped stick. We know that illness isn't caused by demons. We just have to reason from the unarguably wrong to doubting the things that are wrong but the Bible -apologists try to excuse - the earth is not flat and the sun was not made later. The nativities can't both be true, and neither make sense. Then the prophecy of Tyre fails, the transfiguration is refuted by John and doubting Thomas refuted by Luke. Then the problems with the attempted murder at Nazareth, the penitent thief and the discrepant deaths of Judas look like things that are wrong, not eyewitness error.

Claims of Demons, prophecies and God sending dreams (the nonsensical one in Matthew's nativity should make that clear (1) have to be wrong. So the far -fetched excuses for contradictions are not believable, and not even the ones with reasonable excuses ('he misremebered...He didn't bother to mention that') look (under 'clean hands' practice) look non -credible. Then we remember that there is no Passover release custom, the Blasphemy charge makes no sense and neither does Herod jumping to the conclusion that a Royal birth means the scriptural messiah. That's when we should get the inkling of the story construction and how and why the gospels were fabricated. Demons, dreams and shekel -eating fishes are just the starting point. Once we know what the Gospels are Not, we can start to work out what they Are.

(1) Ok Joseph. Herod's dead, you can go back to Judea. Sorry...update, Herod's son is ruling so you'd better go to Galilee instead...where his Other son is Ruling. It's not just nonsense, but clearly a plot -device to explain why a Judean Family ended up as Galileans. For all that Luke has them as Galileans to start with.
Yep...... so there it is.
Newsflash! A lot of stuff in the bible is junk.
But as you wrote, above:- Once we know what the Gospels are Not, we can start to work out what they Are.

Now that's what I like to do. Some of it has already been done, by more recent bibles, for instance the NIV Gospel of Mark warns that it's very first verse which titles Jesus as 'Son of God' wasn't in earliest copies, so black felt pen that one, and so on.
For myself I strip out any mentions of actions which 'fulfilled prophecies', mentions of 'Christ', any actions that couldn't have a natural origin, etc etc.
Stuff that I certainly can keep in is where innocuous 'non-agenda' 'on the side' accounts are mentioned...... even G-John has those because I think that whole gospel was stapled together using a bundle of accounts, anecdotes, reports from all over..... mashed in to a nonsensical stretched timeline where mundane stuff like casting demons has been discarded in favour of spiritual waffle. The authors didn't even know what Jesus did during that last week!

The more I strip out (using reasonable deduction so the clearer the picture becomes for me....that's my perception anyway. I think there was a Jesus and those disciples, but they were doing what Galileans seemed to like doing...... causing mayhem, revolting, uprising.... against a fat greedy corrupted bunch of quisling priests. :)

Try this..... In my opinion Christians tend to focus so closely on the G-John waffle that they ignore or miss the information in gospels like Mark. Never in my IT debating time of over ten years has any Christian given me a straight and correct answer to 'What did Jesus and his disciples do in Jerusalem/Temple on that last 'Palm Sunday'. They'll tell about the trip to Jerusalem, or how Jesus entered the city, or whatever, some even tell me that he cleared out the Temple, others that there is no information in the gospels about that. That's not intended as an open challenge, it's just my experience. True.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3484 times

Re: Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #8

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Excellent. I don't want to go off topic, and I'm not sure how to frame it as a question, but bit by bit, problems and puzzles have been resolved including why Mark ended where it did. Someone on a former board explained it to me - originally, that's all there was. An empty tomb claim (and John refutes the angelic explanation) and we are supposed to jump to the conclusion that this proves that Jesus resurrected. Plainly that wouldn't do, so first, an angel was planted there to explain everything, and that's all Mark originally had. And that's all there was. And second, three (1) resurrection appearances were fabricated separately, which is why, like the nativities, they contradict.

Bible apologists are never at a loss to come up with excuses ..'Mark didn't write an appearance as everyone knew the story' (or it 'got lost') or explanations, like one we saw here - "the Marys split up, one saw Jesus and the other didn't. That's why Matthew and Luke differ". But the Way the resurrections were fabricated is shown by Luke altering the angelic message from the disciples going to Galilee to what Jesus told them in Galilee, plus they had to stay in Jerusalem. And on evidence I know why - he has read Paul's letters and knew that the disciples didn't go to Galilee where Jesus said to spread the word to all nations - Luke knew that they stayed in Jerusalem and it was Paul who took the messianic religion to 'all nations'. That is why he changed the message to link up with Acts where he explains how the apostles passed the mission onto Paul. Or rather, he took it and they rubber -stamped his mission at the council of Jerusalem.
Yes, we can indeed discover how and why and thus by whom the gospels were written. And they are Christian (Pauline) propaganda and polemic, and definitely not eyewitness, not even slightly unreliable eyewitness.

(1) the Gospel of Peter is a mix of Matthew and Luke, and therefore written later than either...which makes it pretty damn' late.

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1802
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 219 times

Re: Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #9

Post by oldbadger »

TRANSPONDER wrote: Thu May 19, 2022 5:36 am Excellent. I don't want to go off topic, and I'm not sure how to frame it as a question, but bit by bit, problems and puzzles have been resolved including why Mark ended where it did. Someone on a former board explained it to me - originally, that's all there was. An empty tomb claim (and John refutes the angelic explanation) and we are supposed to jump to the conclusion that this proves that Jesus resurrected. Plainly that wouldn't do, so first, an angel was planted there to explain everything, and that's all Mark originally had. And that's all there was. And second, three (1) resurrection appearances were fabricated separately, which is why, like the nativities, they contradict.

Bible apologists are never at a loss to come up with excuses ..'Mark didn't write an appearance as everyone knew the story' (or it 'got lost') or explanations, like one we saw here - "the Marys split up, one saw Jesus and the other didn't. That's why Matthew and Luke differ". But the Way the resurrections were fabricated is shown by Luke altering the angelic message from the disciples going to Galilee to what Jesus told them in Galilee, plus they had to stay in Jerusalem. And on evidence I know why - he has read Paul's letters and knew that the disciples didn't go to Galilee where Jesus said to spread the word to all nations - Luke knew that they stayed in Jerusalem and it was Paul who took the messianic religion to 'all nations'. That is why he changed the message to link up with Acts where he explains how the apostles passed the mission onto Paul. Or rather, he took it and they rubber -stamped his mission at the council of Jerusalem.
Yes, we can indeed discover how and why and thus by whom the gospels were written. And they are Christian (Pauline) propaganda and polemic, and definitely not eyewitness, not even slightly unreliable eyewitness.

(1) the Gospel of Peter is a mix of Matthew and Luke, and therefore written later than either...which makes it pretty damn' late.
Yes....... all the angels, manipulations, claims, prophesies etc......dustbin.
And those excuses..... sometimes after debates I imagine how completely knotted up some minds can be after twisting, turning, body-swerving around. And on later occasions they've forgotten a twist here, or a turn there, and need to go some other way.

'Everyone knew the story.' That's such an old chestnut, I often hear it when I ask how, if G-John was written by the Disciple, didn't he mention the most amazing experience of his who life....the transfiguration? (Cephas did). And the 'He didn't need to repeat other gospels stuff.

By the way, when I read 1-Peter and then go straight on to 2-Peter it seems very obvious to me that those had two quite different authors. 2-Peter is more feet on ground, remembering amazing situations, etc etc. Meh...where's the bin? :)

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7956
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 931 times
Been thanked: 3484 times

Re: Can anyone give good reason to believe Yahweh is not a demon?

Post #10

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Yes. I do argue that 'Oh...not one of the synoptics bothered to mention the raising of Lazarus, Jesus' most stunning miracle...because they all forgot or none of them thought it worth mentioning' does not wash. They never heard of it, just as John never heard of the Transfiguration, the Nativity (he tacitly denies it at 7.42) or the supposed assassination attempt at Nazareth (though he does use the 'prophet without honor' quote. That's why I argue that contradictions are real, they do discredit the Gospels and they also tell us how and why the gospels were written.

However (though this is my basic and crucial argument about this whole Gospel, God and Christianity debate) it isn't the topic here. It would be more a debate about whether it would make more sense if God was the bad guy or He and Satan were identical (or in fact it's just 'mother nature' doing its' thing). Or at least it makes as much sense or more that rather than God casting out demons to make Jesus look good, he is their boss. But it's a simple argument and needn't detain us long, any more than the perfectly evident fact that Jesus did not know everything and God kept some knowledge from him. A topic for a new thread, perhaps.

Post Reply