Does the Devil exist?

[jujuman13]

Whatever name you choose to recognise him/it/her as.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

As a nigh-omnipotent foil to an omnipotent Creator? No. As the source of all Evil in this world? No.

As a divine being, the rebellious former servant of the Judaic deity, and a dangerous (and possibly malevolent) force? Absolutely.

 

[Hatuey]

Of course he exists. Every monday morning is a "friendly" reminder that the devil exists.

 

[mikhail]

I actually think the idea of a devil is quite apt as a metaphor for the darker side of people though nothing more than metaphor.

For there to be actual devil surely god had to create him and surely he would know he would betray him.Not that i would like to get into a theological arguement about this (i see theology as the process of taking things out of all context of which they were intended).Im of the opinion that the bible is in no way as deep as people will explain it to be.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Ya and here she is:

 

[The Mark]

Ya and here she is:

Some may not agree.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Some may not agree.

Definitely. I have serious doubts about my ability to take the Devil in a fistfight.

Hillary Clinton? Not so much.

 

[The Mark]

Definitely. I have serious doubts about my ability to take the Devil in a fistfight.

Hillary Clinton? Not so much.

Good point.

Although when I hear/watch/read about Hillary Clinton I get the impression that she is angry about something. Or just angry in general. Seems odd.

 

[Doremus Jessup]

Of course. Who else invented rock 'n roll?

 

[cherokee]

The devil doesn’t drown a baby in the bathtub, or kill his entire family nor does he strap on a suicide belt and get on a bus. He also doesn’t walk into a coffee shop and gun everyone down. He doesn’t drive a vehicle loaded with explosives into a market nor does he launch a mortar attack on a school.

People do those things..
If you wish to look the devil in the eyes just look in the mirror


I would have to say No to your question.
People dont need any help to be evil.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

As a nigh-omnipotent foil to an omnipotent Creator? No. As the source of all Evil in this world? No.

As a divine being, the rebellious former servant of the Judaic deity, and a dangerous (and possibly malevolent) force? Absolutely.

Care to support that absolute claim?

 

[jallman]

The devil/evil is not some maniacal force or some grandiose, cosmic malevolence. He/it is simply the ability of each and every man to exchange his compassion for calculated efficiency. Each and every time someone chooses to lie or cheat or steal or kill rather than show love and understanding; each and every time the path of least resistance is chosen over building bridges; each and every time a man slights another for gain, there you will find the face of the Devil.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Care to support that absolute claim?

I've only claimed that I absolutely believe that he exists. I shouldn't have to support that, since I know the contents of my own mind better than anyone else possibly could.

I have my reasons. Among them is that I take the existence of other peoples' gods as an article of faith-- a matter of theological courtesy. I have experienced the presence of my gods, and thus I have no reason to doubt the existence of others.

I have also known Luciferans. Most of them were just sad little nerdboys with misdirected anger, but a few of them had some real juice behind them. If they claim that it derives from their association with the Judeochristian Devil, I'm not going to question them. They'd know better than I would, and I have no reason to suspect otherwise.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

You're Mistaken Korimyr

I've only claimed that I absolutely believe that he exists.

The OP asks "Does the Devil exist?" not "Do you believe the devil exists?."

This was your reply:

As a nigh-omnipotent foil to an omnipotent Creator? No. As the source of all Evil in this world? No.

As a divine being, the rebellious former servant of the Judaic deity, and a dangerous (and possibly malevolent) force? Absolutely.

Please highlight for me just exactly where in this post you imply belief among all these absolutes.

 

[Thelost1]

Re: You're Mistaken Korimyr

Lachean, he's revising his position.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

Fair enough.

The reasons I have given for my absolute belief in this matter are on the table. Up to you whether that constitutes enough support for your purposes; it is enough for mine.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

Fair enough.

Thank you.

The reasons I have given for my absolute belief in this matter are on the table. Up to you whether that constitutes enough support for your purposes; it is enough for mine.

So be it, it does not constitute enough support:

I have my reasons. Among them is that I take the existence of other peoples' gods as an article of faith-- a matter of theological courtesy. I have experienced the presence of my gods, and thus I have no reason to doubt the existence of others.

I am always skeptical of such claims, which also suggest that I am curious. Under what context was this experience? Was it unique, or was it a repeatable one?

I have also known Luciferans. Most of them were just sad little nerdboys with misdirected anger, but a few of them had some real juice behind them. If they claim that it derives from their association with the Judeochristian Devil, I'm not going to question them. They'd know better than I would, and I have no reason to suspect otherwise.

If their testimony is your reason alone for believing him, the bold statement has an air of gullibility.

 

[Real Korimyr #9]

I am always skeptical of such claims, which also suggest that I am curious. Under what context was this experience? Was it unique, or was it a repeatable one?

I have practiced religious rituals to seek their guidance, and similarly to swear loyalty to them. In each occasion, I have felt the presence of an entity other than myself, with an apparent personality consistent with the description of the god in question as presented in the lore.

It is repeatable, but like any other interaction with an intelligent being, it is subject to their response.

If their testimony is your reason alone for believing him, the bold statement has an air of gullibility.

It is sufficient in the context of being consistent with my understanding of the issue, and with no discernable benefit to dishonesty on their part.