Poor Satan, so misunderstood.

Phat What is it about the manifestations that convinces you that it was God or Satan? And why is it indirect and not obvious?

HeinrikHow do you know what sin is?

HeinrikAnd just what makes those peoples definitions of sin compelling?

HeinrikIf all people sin, and you get your definitions from people {via the dictionary and the bible} what does that say about the quality of the information on which you base you determination of what is sinful?

Heinrik Well if by suppressive you mean limiting then I agree.However, do sins constitute a breach against rules of God or are they concerned with breaches by one person against another?

ICANT Where did God say that? In the bible? The bible was written by men and men cannot be trusted so how do determine the veracity of your claim for God sir?

ICANT But we are not making the claim that men cannot be trusted. When a claim is made then a reasonable attempt must be presented to back up a claim.
To answer that we do not know ,if correct , is honest even if not enough to satisfy some people. That is indeed a dilemma that you must face. However, a good start would be to bring to the fore what it is that you found convincing.
In the course of human investigation it may or may not be that what you accept as sufficient to convince you of the veracity of a position
is ,in fact, demonstratively not so.
Many people have claimed to "know" God in my life, however, the statement " You must first believe that this book {or that text or that man} has the word of God" before you can begin to convince someone of spirituality seems to be an awkward claim.
I think that if something cannot convince me on its own merits without me first adopting a credulous, unquestioning stance then I must apologize for being so skeptical.

ICANT It is a dilemma you must face since ,as you stated before in a previous post, since this presents you with the difficulty of having to show that your argument has merit without the person first agreeing with you. That a person must agree with you first is demonstrated by you saying that they must believe the Bible to be the word of God.Now if you first convince them of the validity of the Bible as the word of God fine,however, in order to be both logical and honest, in convincing them about the bible you cannot make reference to anything spiritual since this would constitute circular reasoning. Then you are saying they are already in agreement with you before you even speak to them? You are preaching to the choir. That is indeed fortunate because then your work is made rather easier. If a person is convinced it is indeed fine. If a person finds another arguement to be better then that is also fine. It is however in everyones interest to examine the evidence offered in light of modern understanding of how both nature works and how science is capable of describing those works.
If you wish to believe that God was the reason behind it that is fine as long as you do not try to explain how he might do that for then you enter into the realm of scientific inquiry.
It is not a badge of pride to be worn that you are ignorant of how the world operates according to science since, if you believe that God is the reason, then you deny yourself knowledge of those inner workings of life and the beauty that is revealed. I have not read it cover to cover. However I have witnessed that the bible does not change people in any real way other than it gives those that were looking for support of numbers and companionship or involvement a focus and an audience.
There is nothing wrong in that, however, I do not see that there is anything inherently supernatural in the Bible and indeed there is much that is just plain incorrect.
I do not need to read the Bible from cover to cover to note that only people implement either good or evil {in the relative state of those terms} and that the Bible {or Koran or other holy texts} tends to be an authoritarian script from which to launch power struggles of both singular and national scope. I never would expect that from you as I do agree that democracy is a great achievement that is worth keeping. You are an adult and from my point of view you waste much of your time in the support of these but I also know that in the course of long life that we are so much more than these dusty records of past violent kings and dubious prophets and that in the real world we occupy we care deeply for the welfare of one another regardless of the disagreements. I simply think that the greatest likelihood is that none of the Bible's supernatural aspects are other than embellishments in order to keep interest in things that would otherwise be lost to the passing of the generations.
In that case there is neither heaven nor hell nor God nor Satan, just human beings trying to make sense in short lives of that which they find themselves in. To quote a great man... R.P. Feynman

ICANT I have also seen people get off of drugs and drink and abuse give it up without needing Jesus or any other faith based support as well. SO what would be the common denominator between these two sets of people who changed their lives around? I think it simply is a matter of them making the choice to do so and following through.This argument holds no more water than the old chestnut that there are no atheists in foxholes my friend.