The Bible does not support the traditional Christian concept of The Devil/Satan.

There has been no offense taken by any statements, but I do want to express thanks to my opponent for his consideration in these things. 5. To allow sufficient space I will address Isaiah 14 first: First, as far as the morning star pertaining to Jesus and the Devil: One must understand what a morning star is: A morning star is simply a star that is so bright that it can be seen shining in the morning, even with the sun out. This refers to those leading spirits in the premortal spirit world who were "brilliant" or "main spiritual leaders". This term can apply to the devil also because before he rebelled and was cast out he had been one of the chief angels in authority there. It is simply a general term that can be applied to many different people. Now, Isaiah 14 I would like to point out to my opponent that in Rd. 2 his translations did not seem to transfer over very well to his posting. I didn't have space to address that last Rd. but for ex:"once in 2 Peter 1:19 to translate the Greek word . ..959;ς (Phosphoros),[4]" that did not make sense to me, and there are several others like that, perhaps I am just not smart enough to figure out how to go about translating these. As an explanation of my previous link I would point out that IT WAS IMPLIED ENOUGH THAT ORIGEN AND JEROME MADE THE CONNECTION, and others, and it is still in the Bible as Lucifer, so this should be evidence enough that it was AT LEAST IMPLIED there. Most people are aware of the literary technique of symbolism that is used frequently in the scriptures but in Isa. 14 Isaiah is ALSO using a literary technique called "dualism". He is writing one thing that represents two different things. (14-14) Isaiah 14:12–15. Who Was "Lucifer, Son of the Morning"? Isaiah again used dualism. Chapters 13 and 14 describe the downfall of Babylon, both of Babylon as an empire and of Babylon as the symbol of the world (see D&C 133:14). Thus, most scholars think "Lucifer, son of the morning" is the king of Babylon, probably Nebuchadnezzar. In the symbolic use of Babylon, (Babylon as spiritual wickedness and the kingdom of Satan), Lucifer is Satan. This interpretation is confirmed in latter-day revelation (see D&C 76:26–8). Satan and Babylon's prince (both represented by Lucifer in this passage) aspire to take kingly glory to themselves, but in fact will be thrust into hell where there will be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. Compare Isaiah 13:13–14 with Moses 4:1–4, where Lucifer's conditions for saving all men are given. What adds to the power of the imagery is the fact that the word congregation (v. 13) is translated by Keil and Delitzsch as the "assembly of gods" (Commentary, 7:1:312). In still another example of Isaiah's beautiful dualism, even the kings of the world lie in their tombs (house) in respect (see vv. 18–19), but Babylon's king was to be cast aside and trodden under foot. This reward was literally visited upon the city of the Chaldees, and though Nebuchadnezzar was certainly buried in great splendor, there is no grave found for him today in the ruins of Babylon. Think for a moment of Satan's "grave. " Never having received a body, he shall never have a tomb or monument of any kind, though he was king and ruler of the great world-wide and history-wide empire of spiritual Babylon. No wonder the kings of the earth, who, though wicked in mortality, could still inherit the telestial kingdom, would marvel at his demise. . http://www.ldsces.org... So in summary, both things happened. The prophecy was fulfilled in the king of Babylon and also in Lucifer. ==== OK back to the beginning: 1. Satan = Serpent I will address some statements by my opponent: "This confirms the implication in the King James quote offered by my opponent that the serpent was one of the "beast(s) of the field which the Lord God had made" not an Angel or Son of God. " -That is why CON made the distinction in Rd. 1 - either the serpent is the devil OR the devil used the serpent to speak. If my opponent requires I am prepared to discuss the concept of "possession", but since the distinction was made earlier and agreed upon, I suppose my opponent accepts this concept. "A dragon is of course a serpent but there is no indication that this is the same serpent from all the way back in Genesis. " -CON has provided several scripture references from the Bible that make the strong connection of the serpent being Satan. All my opponent has said is that it might not be the case. I believe CON's case to be stronger. "The line about "deceiving the whole world" is often taken as a reference to the Eden story, but if we look back at Genesis we see that the serpent does not actually deceive them at all. " -Eve WAS "beguiled" 1. to influence by trickery, flattery, etc. ; mislead; delude. [dictionary. com] Genesis 3:13 And the Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. "God says that they will die if they eat or touch the fruit but the serpent tells them they won't die but will instead have knowledge of good and bad, they eat the fruit and it turns out that the serpent was right. " -the serpent was right that they didn't die IMMEDIATELY, but with the Fall of Adam and Eve death was introduced into the world and Adam DID end up dying. If he had not partaken he would not have died. There also was another type of death that came into the world known as "spiritual death" which is a separation from God. He was no longer allowed to be in God's presence. The serpent definitely deceived them! ---- 2/3/5. Revelation The Revelation timeline is all over the place! The seals themselves each represent a 1,000 year period for each seal. For example: the 4th seal represents those things that happened during the 4th thousand years. The war in heaven has already taken place. Jesus saw Lucifer fall from heaven after he rebelled during the war in heaven. Revelation also speaks of the Millennium (the thousand year period on Earth after the Savior comes). Satan will be bound during the Millennium (future). Con's position is perfectly consistent. 4. & [1,2 in facts] Satan is evil I will use a short story here to illustrate the concept (the idea is also relevant to many of the other arguments that PRO has presented ex: Job, loyal servant, etc. ). There was a bully who saw a girl riding her bike across the street from him. He didn't like her and wanted to push her down and cause her harm, so he ran across the street and pushed her down and hurt her, and he was pleased with himself. Little did he know however, that at the same time a car had swerved out of control and had been about to hit her, so by his actions he actually saved her. God allows people (or the devil) to do what they want but controls the outcomes so that His works are accomplished. God sees with an ETERNAL PERSPECTIVE. We can't have that, but in hindsight we can see some of the amazing things God has accomplished in spite of OR ACTUALLY THROUGH people who want to stop His work. Some examples of God using evil intentions for good would include the Garden of Eden: the devil sought to destroy mankind, but in fact it made it possible for mankind to receive mortal bodies and experience life on Earth and to experience good and evil - which is needed for all of us to progress. Another example would be the crucifixion of Jesus Christ: The devil thought perhaps that by possessing Judas and betraying the Savior and having Him crucified that it would stop the work of God. But in fact what this accomplished was that it made it possible for mankind to be redeemed from the Fall (through the Atonement of Jesus Christ). ---- [3,4] PRO has referred to Satan as a "loyal" servant to God. God is righteous. Therefore a loyal servant of God would be righteous. out of words