Anhern Sarsalor [IQ: 102]'s avatar
Anhern Sarsalor [IQ: 102] _@animestr.xyz 4 months ago
1. if the Church Fathers were part of the deception, we'd basically have no Christianity left. These guys literally learned from the apostles or their direct students. Like, Ignatius of Antioch was taught by John himself. Polycarp too. If they got it wrong from day one, then Jesus failed at establishing his Church, which contradicts his promise that "the gates of hell won't prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18). 2. Job 1:6 literally says "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them." That's definitely God's court, and "sons of God" in Hebrew refers to spiritual beings, not humans. Plus, this adversary has power to afflict Job with supernatural disasters - not really something a human enemy could pull off. 3. Jesus talks about Satan as a separate being constantly - "I saw Satan fall like lightning" (Luke 10:18) wasn't him talking about his own desires falling. And when Peter tries to stop him from going to the cross, Jesus says "Get behind me, Satan" - he's not calling Peter his fleshly desire, he's saying Peter is being used by the adversary. 4. In all honesty, I've never heard this argument. I'll have to think about it, and ask for guidence. But Genesis 3 clearly has Adam, Eve, AND the serpent as three separate characters having a conversation. Hard to have Adam talking to Eve while also being the serpent talking to Eve, you know? Plus, Revelation 12:9 straight up identifies "that ancient serpent" as the devil and Satan. I'm going sleep now, but the Orthodox position is that if we can't trust the earliest Christians who literally knew the apostles, then we can't trust anything about Christianity at all. These weren't random dudes making stuff up - they were martyred for these beliefs they learned directly from Christ's own disciples.
↑ Parent

Replies (2)

Niel Liesmons's avatar
Niel Liesmons 4 months ago
1) Polycarp and Ignatius can only have been taught by John if you place *that* John (it's not clear which one they are even talking about btw) around 90ad, and not around 70ad, as I do (given the timeline that actually makes sense with Jesus imminent return at that time; in that generation). 2) Both the sons of God and this satan are human here. Nothing in the Hebrew makes it spiritual. The same phrasing is used for (god-serving) humans several times. 3) In Luke 10 Jesus is employing a literary device when he says he saw the enemy fall from the sky like lightning. The verb “see” is theoreo which means to perceive, to discern, to view mentally, to see as in a vision. Similarto the imagery John gives us in his vision he “saw”. So Jesus had a vision of the enemies of God falling from their high position, the heavens or sky, and were brought down to earth or made low. “Heavens and Earth” was an idiomatic Greek expression used to describe those in power religiously and politically (the heavens) and the common people they ruled over (the earth). So many of these Hebrew idiomatic expressions have been improperly translated, either in ignorance or intentionally. 4) It does not clearly have three characters. If it would than the serpent it somehow just magically disappearing and shwoing up all the time. Also (angel of) God never adresses that suppsosed third character. Also, how would that character even know what God told Adam? Was he magically there too? Saying Satan is a real evil entity is giving him powers equal to Gods, while also moving us into victimhood instead of self-responsibility over **our own** sin. There's no Satan/Lucifer/Azazel/... with his army of fallen angels and demons attacking you 24/7, knowing everything about everyone. 5) I believe we have what we need in the Bible.
2 replies ↓
↑