Is Hell Fair?

[J.S.]

QUOTE(Ramen666 @ Sep 24 2006, 09:46 PM)

 

The thing is Scott we are using the bible with quotes not another religous book. Your own "Holy" book. All these quotes we have shown you are within your own book and that is what makes you like an idiot. You are falling and eating in your shit now, unable to defend anything anymore. All the comebacks " God is right and everyone else is wrong"

 

 

 

Yes, let God be true and every man a liar. You have given me nothing. NOTHING. No one here can prove that God doesn't exist, no one here can prove the God is evil. Why? Because He is higher than us, and our minds cannot possibly grasp the true meanings of good and evil without Him. All you do is say "Well, the Bible's false. Deal wit dat!". You see? What you accuse me of doing, you yourselves do. It's nothing.

 

 

Scott is getting a little touchy anger is starting to come out of him. By you saying that just actually backs me up a little bit more. Ok every man is a liar, that includes the writers of the Bible because you in fact said EVERY MAN. So therfore that accounts for all the authors of the Bible. They can lie just like everyone else.So the Bible was made by sinful,corrupt liars. No you are saying God is right no matter how much torcher he inflicts on people, how much agony and pain inflicted. The God in the Bible is not right because he does WICKED things. I have showed you quotes of the wicked things and you still call them right. That is the true sickness of Christianity. People worship and a thing that does wicked things and people don't care. Just like the Nazi's and what Hitler did. Same pricipal I can grasp good and evil. God is not good he is damn fucking evil.

 

Scott...Good...anger leads to hate...you are starting to hate us just like the Bible commands. You will soon be so consumed in the Bible you do something will regret. You are following cult and I can't wait to the day that it falls.

 

When you are going to realize that you are not God and you cannot judge the things He does? Uncontrolled anger leads to hate. I don't hate you.

[Astreja]

No one here can prove that God doesn't exist...

Just like you can't prove that I am not (1) the spring goddess in mortal form; (2) the adopted daughter of Odin; and/or (3) an emigrée from the M42 nebula in the constellation of Orion.

 

.

 

.

 

.

 

See?

[nick5]

Scott, nobody here acts like they are yaweh. We are all MUCH BETTER than your crappy version of a god. Therefore "acting like god" is not a desirable thing for anyone here, because it would make us seem worse than we really are.

We KNOW we're not him, and we are fucking happy that we arent.

[Ramen666]

When you are going to realize that you are not God and you cannot judge the things He does? Uncontrolled anger leads to hate. I don't hate you.

 

 

I actually can judge him, I did just now...don't say I "can't" because can't means some magical force would stop my brain from working. I can judge him , anyone can. If you have to worship the fool for eternity. You should be able to judge who are going to worship....

[Astreja]

I actually can judge him, I did just now...don't say I "can't" because can't means some magical force would stop my brain from working. I can judge him , anyone can. If you have to worship the fool for eternity. You should be able to judge who are going to worship...

Já, and any self-respecting god would not run scared from the opinions of its adherents. Is IHVH such a weenie that he needs the likes of you to defend him with cheap lies, Scott?

[J.S.]

When you are going to realize that you are not God and you cannot judge the things He does? Uncontrolled anger leads to hate. I don't hate you.

 

 

I actually can judge him, I did just now...don't say I "can't" because can't means some magical force would stop my brain from working. I can judge him , anyone can. If you have to worship the fool for eternity. You should be able to judge who are going to worship....

 

No, because who we worship judges us {and you}, not the other way around.

[nick5]

Scoot, you're being an idiot right now. Of course we should judge who we are going to worship. I have judged him not worthy. He is not fit to judge me or anyone in the world. And if he dared try, I'd crack his skull open and piss on his corpse.

Of course, he's not real, so it doesn't matter anyway.

But there isn't a single being in the world right now who is worthy of my worship.

 

You're just telling us to shut off our brains and take in everything that we are fed. This is why you are falling for such bullshit, Scott. This is why we are so absolutely superior to you and your fake, evil god.

[Astreja]

...who we worship judges us {and you}, not the other way around.

Um, not all the gods are as judgement-happy as your little tyrant. Among the Æsir, the only judge I can think of is Forseti (who hears both sides of legal disputes). Apollo doesn't judge. Neither does Guan Yin. Or Bastet. I'm pretty sure Durga and Hanuman don't, either.

[OnceConvinced]

Scott-what do you think about babies? They will go to hell, along with the mentally handicapped. There's no doubt in my mind that you have gone to a church that teaches the "age of accountability". Now, I could be wrong on this, but I don't think there's a single bible verse to back that up.

You're right there isn't. The only one than any Christian can come up with is one about God wanting everyone to come to him like children. Which is not saying they won't go to hell. It's just that Jesus wants them to be like Children.

 

There are way more scriptures in the bible that suggest they will go to hell.

 

 

 

 

I beg to differ. No one is more loving, more kind, or more intelligent that God.

How can you read your bible and seriously believe that????????

 

 

Innocents do not go to hell. God is just, but He is also merciful and loving.

How can you say this?? The bible says tells us otherwise! Read it and find out! God is vengeful and wrathful! He will kill you rather than put up with you! Read it! The proof is in the bible! There are far more accounts of his wrath and brutality than his mercy and love.

[mwc]

Innocents do not go to hell. God is just, but He is also merciful and loving.

 

Jesus loves children -

 

"Let the little children come to Me, and do not fobid them; for such is the kingdom of God. Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it. Luke 18:16-17

 

Well, you once again ignored entirely everything I said in my previous post. It would appear, as I have pointed out elsewhere, the best tool to use against you, is your very own bible.

 

So, you point how how jesus loves the little children (all the children of the world?). I'm sure you realize the verses you quote are a metaphor, correct? Probably not since you have difficulty with metaphor. Here's some help http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphor. I know you don't actually read the links people provide for you but maybe you'll take a peek at this one?

 

How do I know these verses are intended as a metaphor?

 

All we need to do is back up a few steps. Luke 18:9-14 has the story (a parable) of a Pharisee and a farmer. One humble and the other not. Guess which was which? It should be easy. It should also be no surprise that the basic point of the story was the (humble) farmer will be raised up in god's eyes and vice-versa.

 

Now how convenient that just after this story we have the "real life" story that says basically the same thing. Be like innocent little kids if you want to get what jesus has to offer. At no point in the verses you quote does it mention that jesus loves the kids. Read it again. He allows the kids to come to him in verse 16 (the setup) to make his point (verse 17). That's all. The children were props in his example to his disciples. A metaphor for what he expects of his followers. Not a sign of love for children and certainly nothing to do with saving them from hell.

 

And just for fun let's keep on reading in this chapter of Luke.

 

18:18

And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

18:19

And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.

But, jesus and god are the same so jesus is good, but jesus says he isn't good, unless he was really saying he was good because he was god but in a sneaky way. Oh my.

 

Anyhow, the main points were that you didn't address my previous message. Your idea that "innocents" won't get tossed into hell isn't supported anywhere in the NT and your verses to support this was simply grasping at straws (additionally it contradicts everything you've been arguing...orginal sin is original sin...the deck is stacked and sadly there is no such thing as an innocent in this situation...if hell is real, I have two older brothers and at least one child waiting for me there). The last bit was just some fun to show that jesus, in Luke, was only a prophet.

 

mwc

[♦ ficino ♦]

mwc and I proved from scripture that God predestines some to hell, Scott (even that He hated Esau). You didn't refute this, you just asserted your own opinions. You also ignored my post about theological language. If it's equivocal, then the bible writers have destroyed language. So when you say that good and evil to God mean different things than they mean to humans, you destroy all discourse.

 

If on the other hand religious terms mean the same thing with reference to us as they do with reference to God, then your definition of God entails contradictions (e.g. omnipotent, good, loving, creates and allows and predestines suffering don't cohere).

 

You also have not faced the contradictions in the Bible. They have been discussed many times all over this site. So it follows that the Bible as a totality is false. You might have recourse to interpreting it allegorically or to being a Christian who is not a literalist.

[mwc]

True enough ficino, proof seems to be the one thing that Scott has a had time dealing with.

 

Here's some more for you Scott. I decided to go ahead and put up the parallel verses "just in case" you wanted to go ahead and look at them.

 

13 And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. 16 And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.

Barring the obvious pedaphile joke in verse 13, it appears that Mark 10 shows no difference that Luke did. The kids are simply there as metaphor.

 

13 Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his hands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked them. 14 But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. 15 And he laid his hands on them, and departed thence.

Looks like G.Matthew didn't change much either. Chapter 19 has jesus putting his hands on the kids. The difference is he simply says that putting your hands on kids is what the kingdom of heaven is like (maybe the secret Gospel of Mark wasn't so wrong after all?). Anyhow, he touches the kids and takes off.

 

Oddly enough, just above this he advocates being a eunich.

 

Okay, here we are Scott. I'm ready to slam dunk (you knew I wouldn't be reading all this for nothing, right?):

 

Matthew 18

1 At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? 2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, 3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. 4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me.

6 But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.

Jesus repeats pretty much what he says in all the other places except for the standout verse 6. This says two very important things relevant to our conversation.

 

The first is that qualifier he tosses in "little ones which believe in me." Not all the little ones mind you but only the "little ones which believe in me." Jesus loves the little children? You bet, but only the ones that believe in him. Just like everyone else. He only likes believers.

 

The second is that threat he makes. If you "offend" one of these kids then you should have a millstone hung around your neck and be drown in the sea. That's harsh. But wait...this is god making this threat. So what does he say again? "...it were better for him that a millstone..." Better than what? This is the harsh punishment. Wouldn't this land the offender in hell? In ultimate punishment? But that's not what jesus is saying. He's saying that if this guy were to offend this kid then he would be BETTER OFF being drowned than dealing with jesus.

 

This simply CANNOT BE in xian theology. This person WOULD end up in hell and this person WOULD be judged according to xian theology but jesus is stating otherwise (and from what I've heard jesus is "god" and so jesus would know ).

 

Jesus is undermining the very argument that Scott has been making.

 

mwc

[LostOrFound]

The second is that threat he makes. If you "offend" one of these kids then you should have a millstone hung around your neck and be drown in the sea. That's harsh. But wait...this is god making this threat. So what does he say again? "...it were better for him that a millstone..." Better than what? This is the harsh punishment. Wouldn't this land the offender in hell? In ultimate punishment? But that's not what jesus is saying. He's saying that if this guy were to offend this kid then he would be BETTER OFF being drowned than dealing with jesus.

 

Ever had one of those "DOH!" moments?

 

How many times have I read that passage? How many times did I preach from that passage?

 

...and yet I totally missed the subtlety that lies therein. Just what was Jesus saying there? Better to drown himself than to offend one of these little ones? If the ultimate result is eternal torment in a lake of fire, what's the difference?

 

Good catch, MWC.

[dibby]

Would hell be spending eternity with a god who ordered the genocide of men, women, children and cattle in the old testament? How absolutely depressing it will be if the infinite intelligence turns out to be such a monster.

 

Still, I guess the people in the promised land had free choice. Move out and stop worshipping your gods or else! I guess they suffered the consequences of their choices.

[sithprincess]

Innocents do not go to hell. God is just, but He is also merciful and loving.

 

Jesus loves children -

 

"Let the little children come to Me, and do not fobid them; for such is the kingdom of God. Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it. Luke 18:16-17

 

It doesn't say they don't go to hell. They have to. They have sin in them right? So they cannot be in the same place as a holy god. "...He is also merciful and loving." Obviously the teaching of a "free will" church. Sadly, it's not biblical. Sorry, it doesn't add up. The Calvinistic view is supported biblically. If this is the only verse to say babies and children don't go to hell, it falls way short of the mark. Sin is sin, and if we're born in sin and hell is for sinners, guess what? Buh-bye, little ones...off to the slow-cooker for you...

 

Scott, surely you have to see that your arguments really don't make sense, and all it comes down to is faith on your part. When I was a believer, even I realized how my arguments sounded, and it always frustrated me to have nothing better....

[sithprincess]

No one here can prove that God doesn't exist...

Just like you can't prove that I am not (1) the spring goddess in mortal form; (2) the adopted daughter of Odin; and/or (3) an emigrée from the M42 nebula in the constellation of Orion.

 

 

 

Whoa!!! You're a goddess?!

 

Okay. This is simple curiosity, Scott. How do you explain the origins of Hell dating back well before bible times? Just wondering....

 

(For that matter, I could also ask how you feel about the bible being books chosen by men in Nicaea, and the very matter of the trinity being established by those same men, since you're always saying the bible IS divinely inspired. Frankly, I think the Vedas would be more likely to be inspired, because they're old as dirt, far older than christianity...Granted I don't know a whole lot about them, but if I'm recalling correctly, noone knows the origin of them - the Hindus believe they were put there by god himself. Makes more sense than god letting men screw around with his words...)

 

mwc and I proved from scripture that God predestines some to hell, Scott (even that He hated Esau). You didn't refute this, you just asserted your own opinions. You also ignored my post about theological language. If it's equivocal, then the bible writers have destroyed language. So when you say that good and evil to God mean different things than they mean to humans, you destroy all discourse.

 

If on the other hand religious terms mean the same thing with reference to us as they do with reference to God, then your definition of God entails contradictions (e.g. omnipotent, good, loving, creates and allows and predestines suffering don't cohere).

 

You also have not faced the contradictions in the Bible. They have been discussed many times all over this site. So it follows that the Bible as a totality is false. You might have recourse to interpreting it allegorically or to being a Christian who is not a literalist.

 

Yup yup. That's what I'm talkin' about. That's what I always did too when confronted with this kind of stuff. "My god is right and you're wrong" is what I had no choice to revert back to. Granted I was never a bible scholar but still...if it's this hard to defend for us paeons...! And I also see Scott throwing in the "You'll see when it's your time to be judged!" thing. I reverted to that too, because, let's face it - there isn't much else...

 

Makes me feel like over the head with something 'til he comes to his senses and at LEAST opens his mind...

 

 

No one here can prove that God doesn't exist...

Just like you can't prove that I am not (1) the spring goddess in mortal form; (2) the adopted daughter of Odin; and/or (3) an emigrée from the M42 nebula in the constellation of Orion.

 

 

 

Whoa!!! You're a goddess?!

 

Okay. This is simple curiosity, Scott. How do you explain the origins of Hell dating back well before bible times? Just wondering....

 

(For that matter, I could also ask how you feel about the bible being books chosen by men in Nicaea, and the very matter of the trinity being established by those same men, since you're always saying the bible IS divinely inspired. Frankly, I think the Vedas would be more likely to be inspired, because they're old as dirt, far older than christianity...Granted I don't know a whole lot about them, but if I'm recalling correctly, noone knows the origin of them - the Hindus believe they were put there by god himself. Makes more sense than god letting men screw around with his words...)

 

mwc and I proved from scripture that God predestines some to hell, Scott (even that He hated Esau). You didn't refute this, you just asserted your own opinions. You also ignored my post about theological language. If it's equivocal, then the bible writers have destroyed language. So when you say that good and evil to God mean different things than they mean to humans, you destroy all discourse.

 

If on the other hand religious terms mean the same thing with reference to us as they do with reference to God, then your definition of God entails contradictions (e.g. omnipotent, good, loving, creates and allows and predestines suffering don't cohere).

 

You also have not faced the contradictions in the Bible. They have been discussed many times all over this site. So it follows that the Bible as a totality is false. You might have recourse to interpreting it allegorically or to being a Christian who is not a literalist.

 

Yup yup. That's what I'm talkin' about. That's what I always did too when confronted with this kind of stuff. "My god is right and you're wrong" is what I had no choice to revert back to. Granted I was never a bible scholar but still...if it's this hard to defend for us paeons...! And I also see Scott throwing in the "You'll see when it's your time to be judged!" thing. I reverted to that too, because, let's face it - there isn't much else...

 

Makes me feel like Scott over the head with something 'til he comes to his senses and at LEAST opens his mind...

[Ramen666]

Scott I have came to these conclusions by YOUR ARGUMENTS

 

1. God is all powerful yet he let's Satan decieve us

2. God is all loving, yet when he orders genocides,murders and even allows slavery that still counts as loving

3. If you don't believe in Jesus you will go to hell, (even babies since they are born with sin)

5. God ways of good and evil are totally different than ours (so if he orders killings, cutting pregnant woman open its still considered good)

6. God is perfect yet he made imperfect beings

7. God CREATED EVERYTHING, that includes Satan, Hell, The snake that tempted Eve, Evil

8. God is all knowing, so he knew mankind was going to fail right from the start

9. God also knows who is going to heaven and hell. (what's the point of belieivng)

10. All men are liars and wrong you said that in a post eariler. So that means the authors of the Bible could just be as corrupted and liars

11. Commandment # 11: Thou shall not question

Commandment # 12 Thou shall not doubt

Commandment # 13 Thou shall not think

[sithprincess]

No one here can prove that God doesn't exist...

Just like you can't prove that I am not (1) the spring goddess in mortal form; (2) the adopted daughter of Odin; and/or (3) an emigrée from the M42 nebula in the constellation of Orion.

 

 

 

Whoa!!! You're a goddess?!

 

Okay. This is simple curiosity, Scott. How do you explain the origins of Hell dating back well before bible times? Just wondering....

 

(For that matter, I could also ask how you feel about the bible being books chosen by men in Nicaea, and the very matter of the trinity being established by those same men, since you're always saying the bible IS divinely inspired. Frankly, I think the Vedas would be more likely to be inspired, because they're old as dirt, far older than christianity...Granted I don't know a whole lot about them, but if I'm recalling correctly, noone knows the origin of them - the Hindus believe they were put there by god himself. Makes more sense than god letting men screw around with his words...)

 

mwc and I proved from scripture that God predestines some to hell, Scott (even that He hated Esau). You didn't refute this, you just asserted your own opinions. You also ignored my post about theological language. If it's equivocal, then the bible writers have destroyed language. So when you say that good and evil to God mean different things than they mean to humans, you destroy all discourse.

 

If on the other hand religious terms mean the same thing with reference to us as they do with reference to God, then your definition of God entails contradictions (e.g. omnipotent, good, loving, creates and allows and predestines suffering don't cohere).

 

You also have not faced the contradictions in the Bible. They have been discussed many times all over this site. So it follows that the Bible as a totality is false. You might have recourse to interpreting it allegorically or to being a Christian who is not a literalist.

 

Yup yup. That's what I'm talkin' about. That's what I always did too when confronted with this kind of stuff. "My god is right and you're wrong" is what I had no choice to revert back to. Granted I was never a bible scholar but still...if it's this hard to defend for us paeons...! And I also see Scott throwing in the "You'll see when it's your time to be judged!" thing. I reverted to that too, because, let's face it - there isn't much else...

 

Makes me feel like Scott over the head with something 'til he comes to his senses and at LEAST opens his mind...

 

 

Oh my...I've no clue why my posts are so screwed up...!!!! How can I delete one of them?!?!

[sithprincess]

Or edit one! I look like such a dork..

 

Typical.

[Astreja]

Whoa!!! You're a goddess?!

So I've been told. (By more than one person, FWIW.) It's largely ceremonial: Every vernal equinox I get to hang out with the Cute Bunny and eat several kilograms of Cadbury Mini-Eggs. Nice work if you can get it.

[duderonomy]

Astreja,

Cadbury eggs? You just might be a Godess! Those beneath you only get peeps!

 

 

 

 

Scott,

 

you said.

 

"Again, if the fire is symbolic for what I've mentioned, then why would God accept someone in the afterlife who rejected Him in this life?"

 

Why would God accept someone in the afterlife who rejected Him in this life? Maybe He wouldn't. I, for one, concede. God is Just and Holy, and without fault and blame. I have lived all of my life as a human being, trying to survive, trying to take care of my family. I have given money to the Gospel, I have tithed. I have prayed, I have gone without sex because it might be fornication, I have painted church signs, and helped to build churches while being fed bullshit and banana on bread for my efforts.

I listened to my pastor at the time, who, after preaching a sermon about babies with water in their heads, bragged about driving 15 miles over the speed limit and praising his radar detector.

 

I, and a friend of mine, found his wife stranded in the yellow Chevy that he bragged about, and picked her up. and drove her to her friends house. There, I had to sit and listen to a tirade from this 'Man of God' about Hippies with their long hair, while over his shoulder was this portrrait of Jesus by Soloman, long hair and beard and all.

 

And they all had the Holy Ghost, or so they claimed. If I were the Holy Ghost, I would be ashamed

 

IMHO.

[duderonomy]

Oh yeah...

 

To whomever added the 'brain...train...' under my nic, I'd like you to know that my mom told me that 36 years ago.

 

Wow.

[NotBlinded]

Oh, now you've done it...challenge my perfect interpretations.

 

hehehe...

 

Right, he is supposed to be speaking against "false" prophets or followers in Matthew. The point being that the same terminology is used in Luke. A person is casting out demons in his name. It obviously works. In one instance he states this is a good thing and those who aren't against us are with us. So people who invoke jesus' name to work magic, even though they are specifically "in the group" are still considered by jesus to be with them.

 

But not so in Matthew. That author has a different take. Sure you can work miracles in jesus name but you will be shown to be a fraud when the big day comes. This also begs the question of how can you invoke jesus' name to perform the task but not his power?

Of course, I don't think there was any magic involved is why it works for me. I see it as more of a healing of one's mind (or soul) which can be done geniunely or by deceit. The false prophets are using deceit to "heal" the ones they speak to, or "cast out demons". That is why the ones that really want to heal can use his name to do it. It's all about intent. Of course that is just how I see it. That magic stuff is crazy...literally. Of course it could be seen as magic when a person's entire life makes a u-turn. But, in the long run it is revealed who one listened to to turn their life around. Look at all the insane literalists that preach about a loving God that is merciful yet dishes out everlasting punishment. Oh...the insanity!

 

I don't take it as preaching. I see what you're saying in many of these cases. If we shift the interpretation from the literal a bit we can get a more spiritual take and "smooth" some of these bumps. As I said in another message, my brother sees things this way and it makes him no fun to argue with. My mom now waffles between a literal hell and the idea that we create our own hell here on earth (the metaphorical hell I guess) but she holds most everything else fairly literal (and that Satan and gang are literal and they go to a literal hell...so it's weird). I think I'm creating a form of gnostics in my family members.

 

mwc

Oh yeah...smooth riding.

[NotBlinded]

You're not right. You've been deceived and you are a deceiver. How can you dare to set yourself up as a judge and a god by judging His action {God, who has infinite knowledge} by your own standards {you, who has finite knowledge}? I believe in Christ and I know who He is. You do not. I'm not stoping because I'm out of arguments, I'm, stoping because you will not believe the truth and I'm tired of "throwing pearls before swine".

I tell ya...I'm about ready to see this sick little boy vanish from here. He is incapable of any sort of discussion other than spouting what his sick little mind believes regardless if it makes any sense or not.

 

At least with Amy, we could see that she had thought processes. Scott is lost.

 

Scott, you are finally making me sick as I am sure that others are feeling nauseated at your nonsense. All you do is spout the literal words over and over and then pretend that you understand what they mean. Take your 'pearls' elsewhere you Gentile dog and humble yourself and maybe the truth will come to you.

[SkepticOfBible]

Satan is not a Christian invention.

I said Devil, not Satan. The word Devil does not exist in the Old Testament, neither is the word Lucifier.

 

The book of Job talks about Satan.

1. And the LORD said to Satan, "From where do you come?" So Satan answered the LORD and said, "From going to and fro on the earth, and from walking back and forth on it." Job 1:7

And if you read the one line it mentions the right there about the status of Angel

 

Job 1:6

6 One day the angels [a] came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them

 

Rebel angels don't present themselves before G-d like his other humble angels. Please present scriptural evidence from the book of Job or the Old testament where Satan goes outside the God given authority

 

Also, Jewish people mentioned Satan in the New Testament.

Once again there is nothing in the Gospels or the Christian Bible which tells us about the who the authors were. It is unlikely they were Jewish, since they seem to be misinformed about the Jewish law or Jewish Courts

 

Dismissing non-Jewish mythology

 

Btw, I am still waiting for your scriptural evidence from the "Old Testament" on hell.