The Bible proves that Jesus is the DEVIL

[TeapotCavalry]

I still don't get the joke. If it were even remotely possible to interpret the passage in that way then it might have been funny.

I think it doesn't take much to interpret it exactly as the OP has stated it.

Jesus answered him, “I will dip this bread into the dish. The man I give it to is the one.” So Jesus took a piece of bread, dipped it, and gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.
When Judas took the bread, Satan entered him.​

Quite apparent sorcery Jesus is doing here. It reads as if taking the bread is the cause of Satan entering him. You could argue correlation here, but that seems more fishy to me.

Just saying daft things is not humour or parody.

Why obviously, it's my sense of humour that will be the judge of that!

 

[psionl0]

Jesus answered him, “I will dip this bread into the dish. The man I give it to is the one.” So Jesus took a piece of bread, dipped it, and gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.
When Judas took the bread, Satan entered him.

When this quote is taken out of context, one could easily speculate that Jesus and Satan were in cahoots. However, the word "devil" doesn't appear once in that passage.

Anybody who reads that passage alone and concludes that either Jesus or Satan is the devil has more imagination than I have.

 

[Brainache]

When this quote is taken out of context, one could easily speculate that Jesus and Satan were in cahoots. However, the word "devil" doesn't appear once in that passage.

Anybody who reads that passage alone and concludes that either Jesus or Satan is the devil has more imagination than I have.

Then who is Satan, if not the Devil? I always thought that "The Devil" was Satan's job title in the same way that "God" is Jehovah's job title.

 

[psionl0]

Then who is Satan, if not the Devil? I always thought that "The Devil" was Satan's job title in the same way that "God" is Jehovah's job title.

Sure, other passages in the bible tell us that Satan is the devil and Jesus hates Satan but the quoted passage says nothing like that.

 

[Brainache]

Sure, other passages in the bible tell us that Satan is the devil and Jesus hates Satan but the quoted passage says nothing like that.

No, but it says that when Jesus handed Judas the bread, Satan entered Judas. Now, either this is some other Satan who has never been mentioned before, or it is the Devil.

The Devil possesses Judas and Jesus tells him to go do what he has to do. Is that Jesus commanding Satan (ie. AKA The Devil), or what?

 

[Ethnikos]

Now, either this is some other Satan who has never been mentioned before, or it is the Devil.

The New Testament mentions a few times that there was a prophecy foretelling that one of his own would betray him, so that what Judas did was the fulfilment of that prophecy.
There does not seem to be such a prophecy in the Old Testament and if you wanted to get technical it would be hard to find one of Jesus, either.
It seems that the Judas character is only a device and it very well could have been anyone and that what Jesus was doing was something like drawing lots. It was a random sort of way to pick one out to be the betrayer. There is some cheating involved because Jesus clued the one he loved into what the thing was that was going to be used as the lottery mechanism, to where he would not have been the next to reach out to get the next bit of food that Jesus was distributing.
As supporting evidence that this is what Jesus was doing, look at how Judas was replaced in order to have the full twelve. The selection process for choosing the successor to Judas was done by casting lots.

 

[Ethnikos]

To explain the actual order of events, my theory would be:
Satan goes to God and demands power over one of the twelve to tempt him, arguing it was not fair play that Jesus was acting as a shield for them, against his attempts to influence them. God decided to allow Satan to tempt one. God informed His Son of His decision and said He was going to leave it up to him which one.

 

[Leumas]

To explain the actual order of events, my theory would be:
Satan goes to God and demands power over one of the twelve to tempt him, arguing it was not fair play that Jesus was acting as a shield for them, against his attempts to influence them. God decided to allow Satan to tempt one. God informed His Son of His decision and said He was going to leave it up to him which one.

Let me see if in the Bible there is any reference to the fact that EVIL is not separate from YHWH and in actual fact EMINATES from YHWH.

Also do not forget that according to the NT Jesus is YHWH and the Holy Ghost. YHWH is the father and he is the Son one entity.

So if we now can prove that YHWH is also the Devil, then Jesus is the Devil too.

BUT.... just as Jesus is a separate entity BUT YET THE SAME..... then So is the Devil .....sometimes separate like the son or the holy ghost....but yet is one and the same ....just like the son and the holy ghost.

THAT IS.... it is it is not just a Trinity…..rather it is a Quaternary of Father, Son, Ghost and Devil.

Here are a few verses from the Bible that would make it hard to dispute that EVIL, Lying Spirits and Deception are all CHARACTERISTICS OF GOD.

In other words .... YHWH (a.k.a. Jesus) is also the Devil.

Also notice the MAGIC aspect of 2Chr 34:24..... God himself is doing MAGIC SPELLS from a book of spells.

1 Sam. 16:16, “Let our lord now command thy servants, which are before thee, to seek out a man, who is a cunning player on an harp: and it shall
come to pass, when the evil spirit from God is upon thee, that he shall play with his hand, and thou shalt be well.”

Judges 9:23, “Then God sent an evil spirit between Abimelech and the men of Shechem; and the men of Shechem dealt treacherously with Abimelech”



2 Chr. 18:22, “Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil against thee.”


2 Chr. 34:24, “Thus saith the LORD, Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, and upon the inhabitants thereof, even all the curses that are written in the book which they have read before the king of Judah”


Is. 45:7, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”

Amos 3:6, “Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?”

Ezek 14:9, “And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.”

All of Job: God ruins the life of Job because he was SHOWING OFF to Satan.

 

[Ethnikos]

Also do not forget that according to the NT Jesus is YHWH and the Holy Ghost. YHWH is the father and he is the Son one entity.

No, no, no!
Wrong and feel free to disprove me.
This is the debate I was in, over in the "what god do you follow. . ." thread.
Yahweh could very well be Satan but he (Yahweh) is not the God and Father of Jesus.
I have a theory that if the angel sent to lead the Israelites out of Egypt chose not to step aside when his time was up, then he would have at that point become Satan.
Anyway, I'm jumping into the middle of your post, but this part bugs me. I just got through debating someone else on another forum over this very issue so not in such a good mood to be very tolerant of this equation, Yahweh= God the Father of Jesus.
So, sorry and I will go back and read the rest of your post.

 

[Brainache]

No, no, no!
Wrong and feel free to disprove me.
This is the debate I was in, over in the "what god do you follow. . ." thread.
Yahweh could very well be Satan but he (Yahweh) is not the God and Father of Jesus.
I have a theory that if the angel sent to lead the Israelites out of Egypt chose not to step aside when his time was up, then he would have at that point become Satan.
Anyway, I'm jumping into the middle of your post, but this part bugs me. I just got through debating someone else on another forum over this very issue so not in such a good mood to be very tolerant of this equation, Yahweh= God the Father of Jesus.
So, sorry and I will go back and read the rest of your post.

You're just making it up as you go along, aren't you?

What on Earth makes you think any of this stuff has anything to do with reality?

 

[Ethnikos]

You're just making it up as you go along, aren't you?
What on Earth makes you think any of this stuff has anything to do with reality?

Right, fair questions.
There may be some "making things up" in that what I believe now about the angel of Sinai is different than what I thought three years ago. But it is based on doing some hard core research into the real biblical scholars. Just finding the right books to read is a real task. But from a knowledgeable base, then you have a grounding from which you can come up with better quality theories. I think it is good to not just allow theories to take over a preferred position in your mind but to air them with other people who may have some info they were able to find which would punch a hole in the theory, so it can be replaced by something else. It's an ongoing process but you need to be willing to take a lot of hits so that bad ideas are not allowed to become lodged.
As for relevance, I think people are affected by the gods they believe in and if people have an evil god that it can affect them in an adverse way. It's always better to have a picture of Jesus blessing the children and giving sight to the blind and healing the lepers, rather than an evil god of the desert ordering the slaughter of babies and women so the smell of their burning flesh will ascend to please their god in heaven.

 

[Ethnikos]

Let me see if in the Bible there is any reference to the fact that EVIL is not separate from YHWH and in actual fact EMINATES from YHWH.
*snip*

OK, that's fine and useful information to collect some good examples of bad things.
I just don't make the same connections you do between the entities.
When I really go off is how certain people do it even more closely and say every instance of god in the old testament is the actual same person as Jesus. All the same person but he just changes his name slightly from time to time. That really bugs me.

 

[Brainache]

OK Ethnikos, I enjoy your posts, I find it interesting to read your idiosyncratic take on these things.

Just out of curiosity, have you read any of the Dead Sea Scrolls? I imagine that those things contain some stuff that people in those days believed, but was later removed from the traditional teachings.

 

[Ethnikos]

OK Ethnikos, I enjoy your posts, I find it interesting to read your idiosyncratic take on these things.

Just out of curiosity, have you read any of the Dead Sea Scrolls? I imagine that those things contain some stuff that people in those days believed, but was later removed from the traditional teachings.

Around 25 years ago I was really interested in that and bought a few books to read up on the subject but I haven't looked at them for a while and took up the Gnostics when that became the current thing, buying more books.
My biggest study is on the more orthodox side (the early church "fathers"), and then with Arius who was perfectly orthodox up until they decided for political reasons to produce a new doctrine of the trinity. So that would be where my real focus has been, with those questions of the nature of the godhead.
Right now I am more interested in what people think right now, rather than in ancient times. But I still am working on learning the biblical forms of Hebrew and Greek to better understand what they were trying to say.
Lots of internet radio shows by people telling their views and the results of their studies. People who are independent and not part of any organization.

 

[Brainache]

Around 25 years ago I was really interested in that and bought a few books to read up on the subject but I haven't looked at them for a while and took up the Gnostics when that became the current thing, buying more books.
My biggest study is on the more orthodox side (the early church "fathers"), and then with Arius who was perfectly orthodox up until they decided for political reasons to produce a new doctrine of the trinity. So that would be where my real focus has been, with those questions of the nature of the godhead.
Right now I am more interested in what people think right now, rather than in ancient times. But I still am working on learning the biblical forms of Hebrew and Greek to better understand what they were trying to say.
Lots of internet radio shows by people telling their views and the results of their studies. People who are independent and not part of any organization.

Thanks.
I guess this shows why so many people like me have a problem with religion; Two people reading the exact same text can come up with totally different interpretations and there is no way to decide if either of them is correct. This doesn't happen in science. With science you can do experiments, in Theology, not so much.

 

[Ethnikos]

Thanks.
I guess this shows why so many people like me have a problem with religion; Two people reading the exact same text can come up with totally different interpretations and there is no way to decide if either of them is correct. This doesn't happen in science. With science you can do experiments, in Theology, not so much.

A good book is one recommended to me when I started on this forum, "Misquoting Jesus". Where the author points out discrepancies in the manuscripts. So when I read the bible, as in the NT, I also read up on the variations between the different texts and how the slight changes in the Greek can make a big difference in the interpretation.
As for theology, the anti Arius crowd were demonstrably wrong by just comparing their proposed doctrine with the NT. These people just fabricated what they thought would fit the imperial system of the day.

 

[Brainache]

A good book is one recommended to me when I started on this forum, "Misquoting Jesus". Where the author points out discrepancies in the manuscripts. So when I read the bible, as in the NT, I also read up on the variations between the different texts and how the slight changes in the Greek can make a big difference in the interpretation.
As for theology, the anti Arius crowd were demonstrably wrong by just comparing their proposed doctrine with the NT. These people just fabricated what they thought would fit the imperial system of the day.

I asked about the Dead Sea Scrolls because I just finished reading a sensationalist account of all the shenanigans the Catholics were up to trying to stop others from gaining access to the scrolls. This book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dead_Sea_Scrolls_Deception) written by the same guys who wrote "Holy Blood and The Holy Grail" is probably chock full of rubbish, but it was interesting. I'm currently looking to find a more reliable source to try to find out more about it all.