God created the world. God created Adam and Eve (totally innocent .. which means they did not understand the consequences of their actions) Because they didn't understand the consequences of their actions, they screw up.
God kicks them out of the garden of eden, so they would not live forever.
They have lots of kids, and but their children children keep on screwing up. God deciedes to wipe them out in a flood, except for Noah and family.
God sees he screwed up again with the humanity thing.. so he sends himself down to earth as his own son, so that he have himself sacfrificed to himself to save the world from himself.
Now, could you please show me justificiation for saying that the serpent is Satan? In the story of Genesis, god cursed the serpent to crawl on his belly forever. Does that sound like Satan. In the book of Job, Satan is walking about the earth. That is not crawling on the belly.
Now there is an example of how later beliefs and prejudices affect the reading of an ancient story.
At the time that Genesis was written, the concept of 'Satan' was not yet introduced into the Hebrew religion. Therefore, it is a later interpretation to say that the 'snake' was satan. Sometimes, a snake is only a snake.
Those appear to be perfect examples of people taking passages, and writign TO them to make them look prophic, when they actually are not.
From my point of view, the people writing about Jesus search the old testament and looked for passages they could make into being something that 'foretold' the coming of the person they believed to be their savior.
I mean, a sign does no good if you don't know it's a sign until after the event.
Except, of course, that is a rehash of the Pascal's wager.. and that is throughly discreditd.
What if you are worshpping the wrong god, and rejected the Koran for the bible?
What if you rejected the Vedas, and the worship of the holy trinity of Vishnu , Brahma and Shiva in return for the worship of a false god?
The problem with Pascal's wager is that it depends on the logical fallacy of the false dicomtomy that assumes that either Roman Catholism (as pascal originally wrote it) was right, or atheism was right.