i have a question that i needed answering...

[KingLeonidas300]

Jesus has told us love our enemies i believe even if they dont love you back isnt the devil a real bad enemy? so i dont understand how that works.

[Arch-hereticK]

Love the sinner, hate the sin I suppose.

[hellas1]

The O.P. ,

In the Bible, humans are portrayed as being deceived and the deceiver is the Devil or adversary in english.

We, Christians, are supposed to fight against spiritual powers and forces and people ONLY in defense of our lives.
It can be argued that a "just war" in Christian terms is ONLY just when it is biblically justified, as was the case in WWII against the Nazi threat in Europe.

Jesus DID say turn the other cheek but that is in our normal interactions with people, not demonic forces!

hellas1: 28: "For we fight not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, powers, forces of darkness in high spiritual places"

[SaDeR]

The O.P. ,

In the Bible, humans are portrayed as being deceived and the deceiver is the Devil or adversary in english.

We, Christians, are supposed to fight against spiritual powers and forces and people ONLY in defense of our lives.
It can be argued that a "just war" in Christian terms is ONLY just when it is biblically justified, as was the case in WWII against the Nazi threat in Europe.

Jesus DID say turn the other cheek but that is in our normal interactions with people, not demonic forces!

hellas1: 28: "For we fight not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, powers, forces of darkness in high spiritual places"

See but it is all perspective of what is really true evil, and what can be considered normal interactions. So basically it is another contradiction of the Bible. There's no spectrum of good and evil, it is reason and perspective that govern decisions, unless your religious of course, then you will make decisions based on what your religion tells you.

[Poet]

Love the sinner, hate the sin I suppose.

Exactly. But Jesus (pbuh) (if he said so) would have said so about humans, because they have bad and good both type of tendencies, as far as Satan is concerned, according to Qur'an he is definitely an enemy of mankind and he is total evil, so we can't love him. Even then there is a group of Islamic mystics who say that if you want to learn something good, you can even learn from Satan, as they say that he denied from bowing his head before Adam, you can take this as his love and devotion with God, that he denied to bow before anyone else.

[Elfdude]

Jesus has told us love our enemies i believe even if they dont love you back isnt the devil a real bad enemy? so i dont understand how that works.

The typical argument as to why god doesn't destroy the devil is that god loves the devil every bit as intently as he loves us. Thus god can't destroy the devil or he's evil and god can't be evil or we wouldn't exist or something like that.

But yes there is no moral objectivity or divine morality to be found in the bible. Only imperfect human conceptions as to what those might be.

[SigniferOne]

The typical argument as to why god doesn't destroy the devil is that god loves the devil every bit as intently as he loves us.

What? I've never heard anybody say that. That's a retarded answer.

Jesus has told us love our enemies i believe even if they dont love you back isnt the devil a real bad enemy? so i dont understand how that works.

This is a very typical taking things out of context. Did he love his enemies in this example?

Matthew 23:13 "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to."

Matthew 23:28 "On the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness."

Matthew 24: "Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. "Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

[Gromovnik]

What? I've never heard anybody say that. That's a retarded answer.

why is it retarded?

[Caecilius]

"Turn the other cheek" does teach a dangerous brand of pacifism. hellas1 was doing well until he mentioned the Nazis. While I agree that this was a just war, you need not rely on a religious mandate to claim this. The Catholic church was basically fascist right wing in many Eastern European countries during the 1930s. In any case, don't rely on religion to provide justification for a war - history has shown that this just ends in tears (Crusades, Catholic vs Protestant, Muslim vs Hindu, etc).

But I fear I have strayed far from my original point. Pacifism will only get you so far. While you may argue that the Civil Rights movement in American during the 60s was fought and won on non-violent resistance; remember that behind Martin Luther King were militant groups who were prepared to be violent. The authorities realised that if they didn't deal with MLK they would have to deal with some pretty brutal characters from these militant groups.

If you are being brutally oppressed by a malevolent force then don't enter that struggle without the will to see it through to the end.

[Elfdude]

But I fear I have strayed far from my original point. Pacifism will only get you so far. While you may argue that the Civil Rights movement in American during the 60s was fought and won on non-violent resistance; remember that behind Martin Luther King were militant groups who were prepared to be violent. The authorities realised that if they didn't deal with MLK they would have to deal with some pretty brutal characters from these militant groups.

If you are being brutally oppressed by a malevolent force then don't enter that struggle without the will to see it through to the end.

Eh, necessity may bring about the use of violence but I don't think violence is the most effective or efficient means for creating support of your cause, especially when dealing with a body more powerful than you are. Civil rights movements are successful because they appeal to natural human compassion and empathy for support and receive enormous amounts of it. The British people would've had an easy time killing Ghandi and his rebels if he had gone the way of the American colonies or Chinese rebellions.

Similarly it was because a widely held white myth about black people that allowed white people to avoid extending the same compassion and empathy to blacks. If the civil rights movement had gotten significantly hostile on the black's side they would've lost their cause by perpetuating the very myth they were fighting. It's simple fact that groups empathize with their members first and outsider's second. By providing an impetus to empathize with the whites and an incentive to encourage revenge by whites blacks would've lost their cause and I daresay a genocide would have happened.

Despotism is only successful because fear can fragment that compassion and guns can give a relatively small number of men vast amounts of power over unarmed peoples. This is why I also urge that for any country to resist despotism universal gun rights must be provided to its peoples and vehemently oppose anti gun regulation despite being a pacifist. The intervention of the people themselves is the surest control of a government's corruption.

[hellas1]

@Sader,

Quote:

"See but it is all perspective of what is really true evil, and what can be considered normal interactions. So basically it is another contradiction of the Bible. There's no spectrum of good and evil, it is reason and perspective that govern decisions, unless your religious of course, then you will make decisions based on what your religion tells you. "

There is really NO contradiction at in the Bible regarding its' stance on God and the devil meaning "adversary" in Greek.

Ex. When Jesus drove the demons out of the possessed man, they begged him not to send them into torment before the appointed time.

See, "Appointed time" is the key. The Devil and his angels know that their time is limited and thus are doomed to torment and they will try to take out people, Christians or not, because they HATE God and humans as well.

The Devil is only a tool that God uses for his glory and once Jesus returns again, the Devil will be out of commission.

hellas1:27 "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood but evil forces which are demonic"

[Ronojoy1917]

Gandhi also said to love the enemy. And I'll say it straight out, I'm an indian and hardcore pacifist, so you will likely hear a note of bias.

Peaceful nonviolent resistance is by far the best way. When you resort to violence, no matter how righteous your cause, you take that first step down the road of becoming the monster you fight. I've just finished 7 weeks of studying the civil rights movement in America so I think I should be able to respond to you, Caecillius. Sure you can say the militant groups increased the pressure on the government, but if there had been no civil disobedience, and the whole movement was violent, I think they would have accomplished nothing. When you start killing people you only reinforce stereotypes and harden the way others see you. I would argue that the nonviolence of the civil rights movement was critically important in contrast to the violence of their oppenents.

to the OP: I'm no christian and I haven't rly read the bible. But from what I hear, it sounds like the devil gets beaten up too much, and someone really should show that guy a little love.

[scarybandit]

These absurd paradoxes don't come up for atheists, at least not in the form of millennia old dogma anyway.

Specifically regarding enemies, hatred is a dangerous emotion to cling to, as it may cloud tactical judgements in any conflict you might engage with them.

"These days the Anglican church isn't so much "GET THEE BEHIND ME SATAN!", as "Come in old fellow, have a cup of tea."

- Not The Nine O'Clock News, circa 1980's.

[KingLeonidas300]

thank you all for the answers makes much more sense to me now im still currently reading everyones answers and views...

[SigniferOne]

Because the quote of love comes from John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that he whosoever believes in him shall have everlasting life".

Does it say that God loved the Devil?

[Gromovnik]

Because the quote of love comes from John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that he gave his only son, that he whosoever believes in him shall have everlasting life".

Does it say that God loved the Devil?

So god doesn't love him?

[SigniferOne]

No?

[Gromovnik]

No?

Isn't he also one of god's creations?

[Elfdude]

The Christian concept of god's omnibenevolence implies love to the devil as well. Hence it's a very common christian belief that god cannot smite the devil until Armageddon because that would be an evil act and thus against god's nature and it's because of god's nature that creation exists at all or something like that. Not my fault you cherry pick which concepts you add detail to and which ones you ignore.

[SigniferOne]

The Christian concept of god's omnibenevolence implies love to the devil as well.

There is only initial omnibenevolence. And it extends only towards humans. You will have to find scriptural evidence that says otherwise.

Hence it's a very common christian belief that god cannot smite the devil until Armageddon because that would be an evil act and thus against god's nature

How would it be an evil act?