Is "The Devil" necessary?

[Mr Walker]

3 hours ago, Grandpa Greenman said:

So if god tells you to take a fly leap you jump off a chair to test god.  I do remember something saying don't test the lord. Either you trust him or you don't, either you believe or you don't.  Say you jump off the chair and sprain your ankle, maybe that happen, because you didn't have faith and didn't jump off a cliff.   God's will or the Devil's will, it still comes down to a pigeon dancing for a random peanut. If a voice tells me to jump off a cliff I'm not going to test it out, I'm going to call my Doctor or 911.   I had a medication cause me to have auditory hallucinations.  It took me a bit to understand what was going on, but as soon as I did I sought medical help.     

You do as you wil.

In my life god is real and powerful with real and powerful interactions. i can't afford to just dismiss this theoretically  If i do something then the consequences will be real and powerful.

So no, I dont trust  god  without question. I wouldn't do something he told me to, to hurt another, for example, because historically in my life, that would not be what god would tell me to do and would run counter to all he has told me BUT if i was faced with a raging bushfire and death , i would obey instantly and implicitly any guidance god gave. God gave us common sense (as my mother used to say) and free will to act  So i have to weigh gods instructions with prior knowledge my own ethics and moralities and  common sense   I don't have hallucinations or delusions (ascertained medically)      so this makes it even more important to act carefully and prudently . Of course if you never test  a god's words you will never know their truth   No, dont jump off the cliff but imagine f you jumped off the chair and found yourself flying  What then?  Ready for a cliff now?      

[Mr Walker]

22 hours ago, XenoFish said:

Because crazy knows crazy. I've always been fascinated by those who "know gods's will". It's a kind of authoritarian thing I suppose. Plus the amount to stock they put into spiritual text. Kinda reminds me of the whole, god of this world bit. Maybe the real heaven is full of atheist and agnostics. 

It is sad that one would  use a word like crazy to describe people who believe in a god, or who indeed commune with a god. Would you consider druids or shamans who commune with the spirits of nature  to be "crazy"? 

I guess it goes to a belief that this is impossible, and so everyone who makes  such claims is therefore mistaken, and must be delusional hallucinating or needs driven. eg driven by emotional or psychological needs to construct such a belief.  .

No professional would diagnose either belief,  or communing with a god construct, to be insane or even mentally ill.  It is quite normal human psychological behaviour.

Of course there ARE mental illnesses which manifest in hallucinations, delusions and imagined conversations with all sorts of imagined entities

However some people know a gods will because that  will is clearly made manifest, and backed up by consequences for following or not following the expressed will of the god.

 The mechanism of communication can come in many forms,  but if it works functionally, and benefits the person, then no medical professional is going to try and "cure " it. Indeed it may be an essential, integrated part of a person's psychological  persona, and  required for their happy, safe,  and functioning existence.    

[Will Due]

19 hours ago, back to earth said:

Will, maybe you think that mankind needs a new religious outlook, is that it ?  If so, do you see that the Urantia Book supplies this, for you ... and also potentially others.

Yes, I most certainly do think mankind needs a new religious outlook. Thank you for asking.

And yes, I also think the Urantia Book supplies this "outlook" but not as a holy book, rather as an assist with the presence that is already working with us from within. To help us achieve the understanding of something new (although it's always been a part of the life of many from time in immemorial). This "something new" is true religion which is personal and unencumbered with primitive rites, priests, institutional authority, and devotion to "holy" books.

I you know that you know BTE, that the Urantia Book is not a "holy" book. Frankly, I'll be surprised if you think otherwise since you told me, you've spent time studying it and undoubtedly know how people, who use it, feel about unduly venerating something (like a book) unnecessarily. 

I will only say this. 

If the Urantia Book is anything, its a book of helpful explanation, a book of direction.

 

 

[back to earth]

18 hours ago, nephili said:

It sure seems possible.

I would go back and count the times the link has been posted and the website has been quoted and promoted, but I don't think I care enough to do that.

all one has to do is type a subject into the Urantia site search box, get the ref and quote it back at people ,...   

 

 

 

[back to earth]

4 hours ago, Will Due said:

Yes, I most certainly do think mankind needs a new religious outlook. Thank you for asking.

And yes, I also think the Urantia Book supplies this "outlook" but not as a holy book, rather as an assist with the presence that is already working with us from within. To help us achieve the understanding of something new (although it's always been a part of the life of many from time in immemorial). This "something new" is true religion which is personal and unencumbered with primitive rites, priests, institutional authority, and devotion to "holy" books.

I you know that you know BTE, that the Urantia Book is not a "holy" book. Frankly, I'll be surprised if you think otherwise since you told me, you've spent time studying it and undoubtedly know how people, who use it, feel about unduly venerating something (like a book) unnecessarily. 

I will only say this. 

If the Urantia Book is anything, its a book of helpful explanation, a book of direction.

 

 

It claims to be the '4th epochal revelation' . 

You just skimmed over that bit  .  But, indeed, you are free to use it persoanally as you wish .

[Will Due]

5 hours ago, back to earth said:

It claims to be the '4th epochal revelation' . 

You just skimmed over that bit  .  But, indeed, you are free to use it persoanally as you wish .

Actually, the Urantia Book is the 5th epochal revelation.

The '4th epochal revelation' is Jesus of Nazareth. 

 

 

[rashore]

15 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Of course. Human behaviour has extreme ranges  in all things, including religious . That is why i used the quote, and explained that we can know what is good by the consequences an action brings.

When you plant a tree you cannot know what it will bear until it fruits when you taste the fruit you will know if it is pleasant or unpleasant  .'However if you KNOW the difference between a lemon and an orange  you will pant the one you want.

if you know good and evil you can act, (plant) to bear the fruit, consequence) you are desiring.  

Just sayin.. if you want to use that analogy again, you might want to change your fruits up. Quite often oranges and lemons are grafted, and due to that practice and depending on upkeep habits.. your lemon tree can turn into an orange tree or orange tree start growing lemon branches. You might want to do something like lemon/apple or perhaps oranges/peaches. Fruits that don't get grafted together.

But to expand more correctly on your analogy... you might not know what lemons/oranges it will bear till it fruits, but when it does you can grow the one you want- if you also keep up maintaining and grooming that tree to continue to produce the fruit you want, and remove what you don't want. If you let your tree just bear it's fruits, it will indeed bear all the fruits it has to offer both sour and sweet, not just the sweet ones you want. An interesting point in this analogy is that you used lemons and oranges- neither are natural fruits, they are both created by man.

[back to earth]

7 hours ago, Will Due said:

Actually, the Urantia Book is the 5th epochal revelation.

The '4th epochal revelation' is Jesus of Nazareth. 

 

 

I was wrong .

You are right .

Now, would you care to address the  corrected issue and answer the question ? 

 

Or is this more games, like before, and you will avoid answering any question that seems remotely tricky ? 

[back to earth]

6 hours ago, rashore said:

Just sayin.. if you want to use that analogy again, you might want to change your fruits up. Quite often oranges and lemons are grafted, and due to that practice and depending on upkeep habits.. your lemon tree can turn into an orange tree or orange tree start growing lemon branches. You might want to do something like lemon/apple or perhaps oranges/peaches. Fruits that don't get grafted together.

But to expand more correctly on your analogy... you might not know what lemons/oranges it will bear till it fruits, but when it does you can grow the one you want- if you also keep up maintaining and grooming that tree to continue to produce the fruit you want, and remove what you don't want. If you let your tree just bear it's fruits, it will indeed bear all the fruits it has to offer both sour and sweet, not just the sweet ones you want. An interesting point in this analogy is that you used lemons and oranges- neither are natural fruits, they are both created by man.

 

I was more interested in his claim that  :  " When you plant a tree you cannot know what it will bear until it fruits '

I planted a lemonade tree in my back yard   ... I knew it was going to fruit with lemonade ... and it did ! 

Not only that, I planted a lemon tree and got lemons , avocados off the avocado tree . At the moment the pecan trees are producing a lot of pecans .  Strangely enough, the same with my veggies. The tomatoes produce tomatoes ... etc .

 

You know ... I kinda suspect Mr Walker's  trees dont actually produce random  species of  fruit .     Knowing the way his mind works, I think he plants a tree, say an orange tree, and then he forgets what type of tree it was .  Then when it fruits .... aha!   Oranges ! 

And the mysteries of life continues !  

For  those with a failing memory , I recommend , when first planting ;

 

 

 

Edited July 22, 2017 by back to earth

[Will Due]

46 minutes ago, back to earth said:

I was wrong .

You are right .

Now, would you care to address the  corrected issue and answer the question ? 

 

Or is this more games, like before, and you will avoid answering any question that seems remotely tricky ? 

I'm not avoiding anything BTE. If I've overlooked a question of yours, it wasn't deliberate.

If you don't mind, what question is it you want me to answer?

 

 

[back to earth]

14 minutes ago, Will Due said:

I'm not avoiding anything BTE. If I've overlooked a question of yours, it wasn't deliberate.

If you don't mind, what question is it you want me to answer?

 

 

You have touted the book rather extensively, then when questioned you 

" If the Urantia Book is anything, its a book of helpful explanation, a book of direction. "

I suggest the Book itself says it is more,  as it claims to be an 'epochal revelation' from God equal to  or an extension of ,the advent of Jesus and Christianity. and you seemed to be glossing over that in your new definition of what the book is .

That is what I suggested you were glossing over  . You seemed to be praising it , lauding it and quoting it continuously,for being such a revelation, yet you all off a sudden  say it is only a book of helpful explanation and direction . 

And then when I say , what about its  4th epochal revelation aspect, you come back with   '5th revelation'

Then I go "okay then 5th , but the answer  to the question ?

you go 'what question '  ? 

If you cant keep up with your own conversations , fine .   But dont try to ....

 

 

[seeder]

Well according to this guy....Satan has been misunderstood

 

 

Quote

 

What the Devil? Prince of Darkness Is Misunderstood, Says UCLA Professor

He's not the enemy of God, his name really isn't Lucifer and he isn't even evil. And as far as leading Adam and Eve astray, that was a bad rap stemming from a case of mistaken identity.

"There's little or no evidence in the Bible for most of the characteristics and deeds commonly attributed to Satan," insists a UCLA professor with four decades in what he describes as "the devil business."

In "Satan: A Biography" (Cambridge Press), Henry Ansgar Kelly puts forth the most comprehensive case ever made for sympathy for the devil, arguing that the Bible actually provides a kinder, gentler version of the infamous antagonist than typically thought.

"A strict reading of the Bible shows Satan to be less like Darth Vader and more and more like an overzealous prosecutor," said Kelly, a UCLA professor emeritus of English and the former director of the university's Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies. "He's not so much the proud and angry figure who turns away from God as [he is] a Joseph McCarthy or J. Edgar Hoover. Satan's basic intention is to uncover wrongdoing and treachery, however overzealous and unscrupulous the means. But he's still part of God's administration."

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2006-08-devil-prince-darkness-misunderstood-ucla.html#jCp

 

 

[Will Due]

21 minutes ago, back to earth said:

You have touted the book rather extensively, then when questioned you 

" If the Urantia Book is anything, its a book of helpful explanation, a book of direction. "

I suggest the Book itself says it is more,  as it claims to be an 'epochal revelation' from God equal to  or an extension of ,the advent of Jesus and Christianity. and you seemed to be glossing over that in your new definition of what the book is .

That is what I suggested you were glossing over  . You seemed to be praising it , lauding it and quoting it continuously,for being such a revelation, yet you all off a sudden  say it is only a book of helpful explanation and direction . 

And then when I say , what about its  4th epochal revelation aspect, you come back with   '5th revelation'

Then I go "okay then 5th , but the answer  to the question ?

you go 'what question '  ? 

If you cant keep up with your own conversations , fine .   But dont try to ....

 

 

 

Have I been rude to you?

Disrespectful?

You said you read the Urantia Book. Then you know what you're kicking.

I'm on the road. But I'll be happy to get to your needs at my next stop and fill you in with the information you already know.

 

 

[Mr Walker]

10 hours ago, rashore said:

Just sayin.. if you want to use that analogy again, you might want to change your fruits up. Quite often oranges and lemons are grafted, and due to that practice and depending on upkeep habits.. your lemon tree can turn into an orange tree or orange tree start growing lemon branches. You might want to do something like lemon/apple or perhaps oranges/peaches. Fruits that don't get grafted together.

But to expand more correctly on your analogy... you might not know what lemons/oranges it will bear till it fruits, but when it does you can grow the one you want- if you also keep up maintaining and grooming that tree to continue to produce the fruit you want, and remove what you don't want. If you let your tree just bear it's fruits, it will indeed bear all the fruits it has to offer both sour and sweet, not just the sweet ones you want. An interesting point in this analogy is that you used lemons and oranges- neither are natural fruits, they are both created by man.

No need to change the analogy  You can tell what a tree is from the fruit when you taste it; and conversely if you know you are planting an orange tree you know what fruit to expect. If a person commits adultery the y already know the consequences( or fruits) of such an act which almost always flow from it When you steal, you know the consequences which are likely  When you take drugs you now the consequences.  Some times knowledge is not enough to stop us acting ,  but  the maxim provides a warning to consider the fruits of any behaviour before you commit to it. 

The rest of your point is valid  but not relevant to the particular saying from the bible  You are correct that all "fruit " tastes  sweeter if effort is put into maintaining, caring for it, and  nurturing the tree or vine on which it grows I am sure there is a bible verse or two which relates to that truth as well 

Not sure about them not being natural.

We use modern cultivars, but then we do this with almost all foods, including grains, potatoes and tomatoes.   Citrus began as small berries and evolved into larger fruits  It was at first not as sweet or edible as modern fruit  but was cultivated  over the last few thousand years, by humans, into present day forms.   The four natural forms from which all modern citrus has descended  were the citron, pomelo, papeda and mandarin .

( I have about 30 fruit trees,  and about 20 different vine fruits) and am about half way through pruning them now  Oranges are just coming ripe,  but  my favorite citrus  are the mandarins 

I think subconsciously i used oranges and lemons because while the y are similar their tastes are the antitheses of each other   You can even get lemons which look like oranges, but if you take one bite you will know the difference We have a number of orange and mandarin trees but no lemons (or limes) , as i never eat them or use the juice,  so for me they epitomised how different fruits can be Apples and oranges, while different have a common sweetness and pleasantness of taste.  

Edited July 23, 2017 by Mr Walker

[UFO_Monster]

In a religious context, a "devil" is needed because he is the "fall guy." If anything goes wrong, they blame it on the antagonist or "arch nemesis" of the deity they worship. If something good happens, they give credit to their preferred deity. Some people go as far as saying that even if bad things happen to good people, it's because it's all some part of their deity's "special plan" for that individual. If someone decides to listen to music that doesn't fit with their ideology or they start engaging in activities they don't approve, they're being "led astray" by said devil, and that anybody who disobeys their deity's commands will be punished like said "devil." Because they believe their deity can do absolutely nothing wrong, that's why--again--they need a "fall guy." The devil is their fall guy.

Edited July 23, 2017 by UFO_Monster

[back to earth]

5 hours ago, Will Due said:

Have I been rude to you?

Disrespectful?

You said you read the Urantia Book. Then you know what you're kicking.

I'm on the road. But I'll be happy to get to your needs at my next stop and fill you in with the information you already know.

 

 

Wow ... its not information from the book its about a question I am asking Y O U    that you  are avoiding like all the others .

and avoiding it again with this statement 

 

I dont actually believe you are  this thick, you are faking it .   So actually, dont bother , forget it  ......

actually, forget the whole thing !  If you are not faking this total lack of comprehension on your part , there is no use discussing things  as you dont have the required ability .

 

 

[Will Due]

51 minutes ago, back to earth said:

Wow ... its not information from the book its about a question I am asking Y O U    that you  are avoiding like all the others .

and avoiding it again with this statement 

See this post: 

I answered the questions. 

 

 

[back to earth]

OMG  ... not the question you DID answer  ... the question you did not answer .

 

 

but now , as I said,  dont bother, as I know how this carry on will continue . 

You go your happy way, and will I go mine .  

 

[Will Due]

1 minute ago, back to earth said:

OMG  ... not the question you DID answer  ... the question you did not answer .

No bother. Post the link to where you asked me a question I missed.

 

 

[GlitterRose]

8 hours ago, UFO_Monster said:

In a religious context, a "devil" is needed because he is the "fall guy." If anything goes wrong, they blame it on the antagonist or "arch nemesis" of the deity they worship. If something good happens, they give credit to their preferred deity. Some people go as far as saying that even if bad things happen to good people, it's because it's all some part of their deity's "special plan" for that individual. If someone decides to listen to music that doesn't fit with their ideology or they start engaging in activities they don't approve, they're being "led astray" by said devil, and that anybody who disobeys their deity's commands will be punished like said "devil." Because they believe their deity can do absolutely nothing wrong, that's why--again--they need a "fall guy." The devil is their fall guy.

Scapegoat. 

[granitesquare]

Is the devil necessary? Sure. It's the other side of the same coin. The reality is up/down, light/dark, in/out, etc., etc. therefore good does not exist without its' opposite and god also has an opposite. We can apply different term, names, etc. but in this reality, at least, it's that way.

[Khanivore]

On 21/07/2017 at 11:43 AM, Mr Walker said:

Quote

Simple When you understand plate tectonics you know what causes earthquakes and volcanoes When you know this you don't need to believe that they are caused by angry gods ,and would be foolish/illogical to do so.  you are correct true knowldge only comes form personal experience . However  yes i do trust the facts presented by science due to the nature of the scientific process used to verify those facts.

 You mention plate tectonics again, these are simply theories and I understand how science today has evolved to accept theories as facts and untested theories too. Your missing the point, most of the science you believe in today in purely theoretical in nature dressed up in mathematical garb. My point is that what you trust as facts from scientists and their books is based in blind faith in the hope they know what they are doing, but they do not pass the scientific method. That's my point most of what you believe is beyond that the standard you assume gives you facts. Science in its nature does not provide facts, it's an inductive method capable only of giving the best probability not 100% facts. 

Quote

Unfortunately you are right.  There are many ignorant and uneducated people in the world. However most of them have access to google and so can always FIND knowledge they never learned in school; like the fact that earthquakes and volcanoes are NOT caused by angry gods but by natural forces in the earth's crust.

Yes I agree, but a theist is not deterred by that, they can claim God uses these mechanisms to cause these catastrophes, then what? As for the earth's crust, we have never been through it, it's all speculation, good speculation but not Scientifically or empirically proven because it's not gone through the scientific method nor can it actually be proven by it yet. So my point being you hold blind faith the science clergy and the theist in his God. 

Quote

The bible has much truth and wisdom. However creationism is a belief which can only be held onto, by disregarding science.  That is dangerous but, to some people, god and the bible offer much more than science does and so the y are prepared to run the risk. .

Im not touting creationism but I disagree, science is not the monopoly of atheists nor are its origin with them. Science started with religion and real science and religion are compatible, but only in the west are they separated due to the historical baggage of the church and its stance, deeply ingrained in to the psyche. 

Quote

Science explains one form of, " Why we are here". The other is a metaphysical question and thus only answerable through our own minds. The reason YOU exist might be very different to the reason why I exist, for example, but we are both here due to the same natural process of time and energy.  We only ask the question why because of the nature of human cognition and slef aware consciousness

Our nature dictates we seek a purpose, you do it everyday in life. Universal purpose not individual purpose. For example what purpose does the sun have for you, is it different to mine? We know what the suns purpose is and it's a universal in the sand way we have purpose too, just like everything else in the universe has its unique role and purpose. For example, your socks have a purpose, if you put them on your hands, head they purpose changed? No! They purpose is to protect your feet etc, so we give more value to inanimate objects by knowing their purpose but when it comes to us, self reflection, ah we have no need for purpose, valuing inanimate objects over ourselves. 

Quote

We dont like to be told, " Well actually there is NO specific reason. .We were not put here for any specific reason or purpose.  we are not the product of something else's mind and hands. We are simply the product of a long period of evolution and change which brought us to the point we are today" Once this is realised we can then say, "ok then I will make a purpose  for myself and my life. I will make a difference.  I will create and build,   improve and educate, so that the world is a better place for me having lived ".  

You see the above makes no sense. It's a standard atheist cop out, we do not need a purpose etc. I asked why does the universe exist at all. Your answer in affect is," well it just is " your science explains how the universe works not why it exists at all or why we do. To say we just do get on with it is a cop out. It does not sit well with human nature to have the answer it just is, that does not suffice for curios, intelligent, self aware specie. Yet is not ironic for someone who accepts science, requires answers for how things work, but use cop excuses when asked well why we exist at all? Ah well we just do, like as though that is a fulfilling satisfying answer, you know it's not! 

Quote

No there are no concepts beyond the capacity of the human mind  Give me any that you think is  and i will explain it to you.   There are two forms of physical reality; that which exists and is held in common outside a human mind, and that which exists and is held singularly within a human mind. 

There are concepts beyond human capacity. The metaphysical can only be reasoned for because it's beyond it physical reality and everything we perceive and experience. God is one, that's why when you picture a God is either a man God or associated to something within our reality we can relate to, but God as metaphysical reality is beyond all that. 

Quote

Thoughts  emotions memories  dreams  etc are all physical things (biophysical and constructed form matter and energy)  which can be measured, seen  copied etc using sufficient technology.  The nature of mind consciousness and thought even what we think of as the human soul,  can not only be understood but is capable of being replicated artificially,. and will be by humans, within the next hundred years or two.  

The above statement says it all. First of all you equate emotions, feelings, memories down to electrical impulses in the brain, therefore they have no real intrinsic meaning to them. When you tell your loved ones that you love them, it's meaningless and ephemeral in nature then is it or not? So what about the senses that you use to understand the physical world around you, they all take place in the brain, you don't see with you eyes or listen with your ears, it's all inside the brain, which itself is isolated from the external world, light, sound, touch, taste etc, total isolation yet it tells what you perceive of you external world. That begs the question what is the true nature of our external reality, if it's all an occurring in the brain? In addition then, you cannot prove anything about the external world using the scientific method, because reality is in side your head. So how do you reconcile that with your physical reality which you believe is the sum of all reality. Then mention consciousness like as though we know what it is, if your reality is being perceived in isolation to the external world, what is the audience of that perception in your brain or head if not a conscious or soul? You can't have it both ways, if all your emotions, memories etc are a product of electrical impulses in the brain, then so is your physical reality, so how real are your emotions and your the physical world. Your point raises more questions than answers and those questions become metaphysical in nature. 

Quote

Tell me.  Why is it that you think that things like yourself, or the universe, need a purpose to exist.  What is purpose but a word/conceptual abstract construct, created by humans to help them understand and define their existence.  We invented the idea of purpose to help us come to terms with our existence.

What's the alternative, according to you, we are just hear, deal with it, we don't need know why, just need to know how things work. Hmm not very scientific or inquisitive in nature, which doesn't suffice as an answer to most humans, unless you use it as a cop out to reconcile your belief system which is scientism and if answers like, "well it just is" are sufficient for shallow minds as an explanation. Like I said before everything around you has its purpose, but we don't? How does that work and how do you reconcile it? 

Quote

It also has a functional meaning which we imbue ourselves with. ie a sense of purpose which we construct for ourselves,  drives us to achieve.It is thus an evolved cognitive function whose purpose is to motivate, and drive us to do more than just survive.   

There is no metaphysical  other than things like philosophical questions (  ie there is nothing which is physically  super natural) There are   only physical things, as yet beyond the reach of our knowledge and technologies 

You conflate the two, purpose self imbued to drive some one to achieve a certain goal is different to a universal purpose. Two different things. You claim its a result of cognative evolution, have you ever observed this evolutionary process, then repeated, tested and verified it, you know via the scientific method? Dint think so, it's theory which can not substantiated by the very method you worship, so it's blind faith. You claim there is no metaphysical, yet I bet you believe you multiverse etc, they are metaphysical concepts ie beyond our physical reality. Then you claim there is only the physical reality. If that's the case, like I said before how do you reconcile the fact your physical reality is a result of electrical impulses in the brain the same equivocation to your emotions, memories etc being a result of same process? You can't even verify empirically and scientifically your claims about the physical reality. 

 

[Khanivore]

On 20/07/2017 at 4:56 PM, Will Due said:

Whether or not good is absent, evil doesn't exist unless it is chosen. That's why the devil may have done good, mixed in with the evil he chose to do. 

"Lucifer's folly was the attempt to do the nondoable, to short-circuit time...."

 

 

 

Yes I agree to an extent. Your right one has to choose to do evil. 

[Khanivore]

On 20/07/2017 at 4:14 PM, ChaosRose said:

I'm assuming that you're Muslim because you discussed Djinn. What are the Muslim ideas about omniscience of God? 

Ultimately, people are either getting their ideas about God from their religious texts or from their own thoughts, neither of which anyone knows are correct. And even if they believe they're in communication directly with God, how could one know that? Might just be Djinns messing with you, eh? In fact, how would anyone know if they were responsible for the corrupting the texts? 

These are in fact very good questions and points. Answer follows

In Islam the Quran is believed to be the literal word of God, inimitable and unsurpassed. Entertain that notion for a, moment, god in the Quran gives a description of himself, we know he can see, hear etc but does he have eyes like us, hearing like us etc. No! The corner stone of Islamic and acid test used on anything that claims to be God is put through the following verse. 

1. Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
4. And there is none like unto Him.

Therefore what ever we imagine God to be it will be incorrect because we would naturally incorporate his creation in to what we think he would be like, even if imagination is limited to physical reality reside in. So there is nothing like, he's not a man God or demi God etc etc. He is separate to his creation, external to it (metaphysical reality) and he all power over his creation and he has power over everything. 

There are many reasons Muslims accept the Quran as the word of God, but the main ones are, it's linguistic miracles, inimitable, it's challenge has not met and the effect it has on its readers and many more. The reason djinn are dismissed as a source is because the Quran challenges mankind to reproduce something like it or better, just one verse, it challenges both mankind and djinn collectively telling them to pull on an the resources of the universe to just produce one verse like it in Arabic. Djinn are sentient beings like us and have the freedom of choice too. The Quran challenges them and invites them to Islam too. 

[GlitterRose]

1 hour ago, Khanivore said:

These are in fact very good questions and points. Answer follows

In Islam the Quran is believed to be the literal word of God, inimitable and unsurpassed. Entertain that notion for a, moment, god in the Quran gives a description of himself, we know he can see, hear etc but does he have eyes like us, hearing like us etc. No! The corner stone of Islamic and acid test used on anything that claims to be God is put through the following verse. 

1. Say: He is Allah, the One and Only;
2. Allah, the Eternal, Absolute;
3. He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;
4. And there is none like unto Him.

Therefore what ever we imagine God to be it will be incorrect because we would naturally incorporate his creation in to what we think he would be like, even if imagination is limited to physical reality reside in. So there is nothing like, he's not a man God or demi God etc etc. He is separate to his creation, external to it (metaphysical reality) and he all power over his creation and he has power over everything. 

There are many reasons Muslims accept the Quran as the word of God, but the main ones are, it's linguistic miracles, inimitable, it's challenge has not met and the effect it has on its readers and many more. The reason djinn are dismissed as a source is because the Quran challenges mankind to reproduce something like it or better, just one verse, it challenges both mankind and djinn collectively telling them to pull on an the resources of the universe to just produce one verse like it in Arabic. Djinn are sentient beings like us and have the freedom of choice too. The Quran challenges them and invites them to Islam too. 

With that first bold sentence, you're not alone. Lots of people think that way about their religious texts. And all of the religious texts do seem to contradict themselves.

And that second bold sentence is clearly part of the problem. All we have is the words of people who imagined what God is like.