View Full Version : The Devil
Listened to http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/history/inourtime/ram/inourtime.ram on the way home a few days ago, and was intreagued on the various views of the devil that people have.
What are your views on this charactor, and how have you reached them?
My view is that satan isn't a person you can see, touch or hear but more of an entity like an 'atmosphere', or a 'mood' so to speak.
My view is that satan isn't a person you can see, touch or hear but more of an entity like an 'atmosphere', or a 'mood' so to speak.
a good way of thinking about it. Better than the big read man with horns who live under the ground
My view is that satan isn't a person you can see, touch or hear but more of an entity like an 'atmosphere', or a 'mood' so to speak.
What do you think it's purpose is?
My view - The Chap (or chapess) whom holds up all the traffic when I'm trying to get somewhere in the car.
O and gives me a headache when I've been drinking
What do you think it's purpose is?
Erm.....you do realise who posted that?? :D
Just to recap, I believe he is put here as part of God's preference for us to choose Him in the face of temptation, for us to demonstrate who our loyalties lie with.
Erm.....you do realise who posted that?? :D
Just to recap, I believe he is put here as part of God's preference for us to choose Him in the face of temptation, for us to demonstrate who our loyalties lie with.
Yes I did realise it was from you, hence I asked the question, knowing I'd get a good intelligent reply :) (course you know my reply's gonna be slightly silly)
So the devil is an entity (not a horned bloke with a high gas bill <- told you it would be slightly silly) who basically works for god ("work" here is used loosly) trying to tempt people, as a check on their loyalty to god, rather than as a being who is god's adversary who wants to spread evil?
So the devil is an entity (not a horned bloke with a high gas bill <- told you it would be slightly silly) who basically works for god ("work" here is used loosly) trying to tempt people, as a check on their loyalty to god, rather than as a being who is god's adversary who wants to spread evil?
Putting a pedantic spin on my reply, he doesn't work for God per se, it's just he was given limited powers to do certain things so God uses him for that purpose.
Calling him God's adversary is also slightly incorrect as that would indicate they are enemies of fairly equal standing. Satan can and will never have a fraction of my God's power, he just uses his abilities to get as much as he can during a limited timeframe.
The Devil is just another word to describe the deeply,dark, evil nature of mankind.I've never thought of the devil as having horns.He's more likely to appear as a nice beautiful,attractive, engaging human.After all think about how Ted Bundy managed to kill so many young women. :(
Incog.
The Devil is just another word to describe the deeply,dark, evil nature of mankind.I've never thought of the devil as having horns.He's more likely to appear as a nice beautiful,attractive, engaging human.
Yet again Coggy hits the nail right on the head.
Theodoric
14-12-2003, 21:45
Erm.....you do realise who posted that?? :D
Just to recap, I believe he is put here as part of God's preference for us to choose Him in the face of temptation, for us to demonstrate who our loyalties lie with.
The problem with that argument is that if God made us why does he want to test us and then send us to eternal damnation if we fail this test? Talk about judge, jury and executioner! Life makes much more sense (this is not to say that it makes life more bearable or comfortable) if you assume that there is no Christian god. Assuming some remote creator who has no personal interest in us is a totally different thing, of course.
The problem with that argument is that if God made us why does he want to test us and then send us to eternal damnation if we fail this test?
He wants us to *choose* Him - making us all like mindless zombies would serve no purpose.
Theodoric
14-12-2003, 21:53
Well, unless you are an out and out Dualist (and therefore extremely heretical) the Bible guarantees that he will eventually lose. So, what is the point of having him in the first case? As I have just posted, why does God feel it necessary to create us and then test us to destruction?
Well, unless you are an out and out Dualist (and therefore extremely heretical) the Bible guarantees that he will eventually lose. So, what is the point of having him in the first case?
God put us here for a limited time. During our lifetimes He would like to see us choose Him. He knows that satan will make life difficult but gives us His assurance that satan will get his butt kicked in time.
As I have just posted, why does God feel it necessary to create us and then test us to destruction?
Already answered, although 'to destruction' is not a phrase I'd agree with. :)
Didn't the "evilness" of the devil come about in the dark ages?
Can someone give examples of the devil being "evil" in the bible? My knowledge of it is a little rusty :)
I think satan means something like stumbling block in hebrew, and all the times I remember he's mentioned, it's as a tempter.
Islam, I believe, view shaitan as a trickster, tempter, and bringer of lies, but is still a tool of god, something to remember when you hear islamists calling America "the great satan"
Theodoric
14-12-2003, 21:58
He wants us to *choose* Him - making us all like mindless zombies would serve no purpose.Yes, I see the argument against being mere automatons, but God deals out both nature and nurture, that is our environment and our genetic inheritance. Furthermore, if you are a protestant, you can't earn God's grace, you have to be freely given it. So, how much free will do we actually have?
He wants us to *choose* Him - making us all like mindless zombies would serve no purpose.
Where in the bible does it mention something like that? (meaning mindless zombies)
likely to appear as a nice beautiful,attractive, engaging human.
Incog.
Anyone seen the Film "End of days"?.. Portrays the devil pretty good, uses alotta temptation..
Anyone seen the Film "End of days"?.. Portrays the devil pretty good, uses alotta temptation..
Hah! That was a terrible film and the devil was still portrayed at the end as having horns.
Incog.
Anyone seen the Film "End of days"?.. Portrays the devil pretty good, uses alotta temptation..
ironically steve i watched it the other night.....good film :tu:
my opinion of the devil......i don't think he is a person as you or i are, i think he is a spiritual being of sorts....who does seem to have power over the world but not in the same realm as God.... biblically...i think satan was the fallen angel...He was jealous of how humans worshipped God...and the amount of time and energy God gave humans and tried to rebel against God...but was cast out of heaven.....(towny correct me if i am wrong there)
Hah! That was a terrible film and the devil was still portrayed at the end as having horns.
Incog.
Didnt see all of it, but thought it was a cracking film.. From what I saw, had the exact same impression I had of the Devil, Someone so evil, yet so amicable in ways to get you to do what he wants, by tempting you.
Didnt see all of it, but thought it was a cracking film.. From what I saw, had the exact same impression I had of the Devil, Someone so evil, yet so amicable in ways to get you to do what he wants, by tempting you.
indeed i think that is what the devil would be....have been reading the "screwtape tales" (i think..cant remember exact title) by CS lewis and that is kinda how the devil and his minions come acorss
How does the bible portray the devil though?
The horns and pitchfork have been added by man, as we all know, so what do you get from the bible about him?
I know there isn't a description of what he looks like, only his deeds, what were they?
The BBC broadcast mentions Job and the three temptations of jesus (after he'd gone out in to the desert for a long time (which is what the hebrew "40 days and 40 nights" is slang for))
How does the bible portray the devil though?
The horns and pitchfork have been added by man, as we all know, so what do you get from the bible about him?
I know there isn't a description of what he looks like, only his deeds, what were they?
The BBC broadcast mentions Job and the three temptations of jesus (after he'd gone out in to the desert for a long time (which is what the hebrew "40 days and 40 nights" is slang for))
yaha job is all about satan trying to get Job to denounce God.....through taking away his family, his wealth, covering him in boils etc..... there is a lot of stuff in there
yaha job is all about satan trying to get Job to denounce God.....through taking away his family, his wealth, covering him in boils etc..... there is a lot of stuff in there
Wasn't that with god's permission?
Didn't god tell him he could do anything, but couldn't kill him?
Wasn't that with god's permission?
Didn't god tell him he could do anything, but couldn't kill him?
exactly.....tbh thats one thing that always confused me....maybe towny would be a better person to ask
Well the Devil is not doing a good job,I have not had any tempatation for a long time :blush: just a little would be nice :)
Resistance is Futile
Wasn't that with god's permission?
Didn't god tell him he could do anything, but couldn't kill him?
Satan said that Job (who was up until that point) fiercely loyal to God but if he had bad things happen to him, he'd dennounce God so satan was given permission to do these things to him to see if he would curse God and give up his faith. That's just one example of the way we are tested, although the word 'test' IMO sounds a bit harsh and inappropriate.
Satan said that Job (who was up until that point) fiercely loyal to God but if he had bad things happen to him, he'd dennounce God so satan was given permission to do these things to him to see if he would curse God and give up his faith. That's just one example of the way we are tested, although the word 'test' IMO sounds a bit harsh and inappropriate.
The interesting point tho, imho, is that he asked permission to do these things, showing he still "reported" to god, if you get what I mean.
As a totally seperate being, why would he have bothered asking god? He'd have been able to just go ahead and do what he wanted to Job, hoping to turn him against god, and then gone to god with the results (f they were in his favour.
Course if Job still accepted the bad with the good, then satan would have done better to not mention it and hope god doesn't bring it up at a later date (god being omnipotent would have known what went on)
Another interesting point is that rather than god just telling satan the result, that Job's faith would not be broken, god chose to actually allow satan to torture Job. It's bugging me. Is there some reason why satan wouldn't take god at his word?
I'm kinda assuming with the above that god doesn't just run simulations of all possible outcomes, but being omnipotent actually would know the outcome
PS Why don't we spell Job as Jobe?
My view is that satan isn't a person you can see, touch or hear but more of an entity like an 'atmosphere', or a 'mood' so to speak.
Bah no sorry I've seen it. Its my ex believe me
The interesting point tho, imho, is that he asked permission to do these things, showing he still "reported" to god, if you get what I mean.
As a totally seperate being, why would he have bothered asking god? He'd have been able to just go ahead and do what he wanted to Job, hoping to turn him against god, and then gone to god with the results
Satan did not originally have the power that God gave him to tempt Job with. He had to ask for it.
Another interesting point is that rather than god just telling satan the result, that Job's faith would not be broken, god chose to actually allow satan to torture Job. It's bugging me. Is there some reason why satan wouldn't take god at his word?
You kind of sum it up with....
I'm kinda assuming with the above that god doesn't just run simulations of all possible outcomes, but being omnipotent actually would know the outcome
The belief is that God sees the outcome of each and every decision we make from birth to death. He would have known the outcome if Job had dissed Him, as well as if he'd stayed loyal to Him. What it's important to remember is satan's fall from grace was caused by pride - he knows he can't win against God so he wants to get as much power and influence while he can. There's a saying us Jesus-freaks often come out with regarding guilt, "When satan reminds you of your past, remind him of his future".
PS Why don't we spell Job as Jobe?
Maybe for the same reason that we don't pronounce Jesus the way it was meant to, which would have sounded something like "Heyzooz" :D
The belief is that God sees the outcome of each and every decision we make from birth to death. He would have known the outcome if Job had dissed Him, as well as if he'd stayed loyal to Him. What it's important to remember is satan's fall from grace was caused by pride - he knows he can't win against God so he wants to get as much power and influence while he can. There's a saying us Jesus-freaks often come out with regarding guilt, "When satan reminds you of your past, remind him of his future".
So if god therefore knew that Job would still remain faithful, why put Job through all that pain?
What is it about the devil that prevented god just saying "look, I'm omnipotent and have seen that no matter what you throw at Job, he'll still remain faithful. Trust me on this, after all, I am god, would I lie to you?"
As you said, satan had to ask for permission to do those things to Job and request the power to do it, therefore he's simply a tool of god.
Which brings me to ask; As an angel, if the devil didn't have freedom of choice like humans have, how could he have chosen to turn against god?
Maybe for the same reason that we don't pronounce Jesus the way it was meant to, which would have sounded something like "Heyzooz" :D
Isn't that just the spanish pronounciation? :D
downquark1
15-12-2003, 19:51
So if god therefore knew that Job would still remain faithful, why put Job through all that pain?
What is it about the devil that prevented god just saying "look, I'm omnipotent and have seen that no matter what you throw at Job, he'll still remain faithful. Trust me on this, after all, I am god, would I lie to you?"
As you said, satan had to ask for permission to do those things to Job and request the power to do it, therefore he's simply a tool of god.
Which brings me to ask; As an angel, if the devil didn't have freedom of choice like humans have, how could he have chosen to turn against god?
Isn't that just the spanish pronounciation? :D
I thought Job broke in the end :confused:
I thought Job broke in the end :confused:
Nah, think his missus pointed out that if you're going to accept the good times, you've got to accept the bad times too, dunno why this should be the case, but I'm guessing that with all the boils and crap that was going on with Job, he wasn't in a fit state to point out what a daft statement she'd just made was, and like the best of men, just went along with what his missus said for a peaceful life :D
So if god therefore knew that Job would still remain faithful, why put Job through all that pain?
What is it about the devil that prevented god just saying "look, I'm omnipotent and have seen that no matter what you throw at Job, he'll still remain faithful. Trust me on this, after all, I am god, would I lie to you?"
Yeah of course God knew, but isn't the whole story about Job(e) having to make the choice, and the Devil to understand that he accepts that there will be bad times among the good.
I have read a book called menmoch the devil (I just can't stop talking about anne rice) and i really like the description of the devil on that story, can't go into it now has have to shoot, but read it if you can
Lord Nikon
16-12-2003, 13:12
Ok, to take a stance straight from buddhism, Life is about balance, or, to any newtonian physicists for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
This action / reaction sequence is how we measure things. We measure gravity from the force it exerts on a falling object.
Why should it not be the same with good and evil?
Without evil there would be no way to judge good, How do you know what good IS unless you have a knowlege of evil?
Same with the concept of God and The Devil, both are opposite sides of the same coin. one representing the Light, one Representing the Dark Without one you cannot have the other.
In their simplest forms they are as light and dark, yin and yang.
How would we know what Light was unless we compared it to dark?
p.s. Funny you should mention Anne Rice / Menmoch the Devil.. I just finished reading Blackwood Farm...
downquark1
16-12-2003, 13:23
Ok, to take a stance straight from buddhism, Life is about balance, or, to any newtonian physicists for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
This action / reaction sequence is how we measure things. We measure gravity from the force it exerts on a falling object.
Why should it not be the same with good and evil?
Without evil there would be no way to judge good, How do you know what good IS unless you have a knowlege of evil?
Same with the concept of God and The Devil, both are opposite sides of the same coin. one representing the Light, one Representing the Dark Without one you cannot have the other.
In their simplest forms they are as light and dark, yin and yang.
How would we know what Light was unless we compared it to dark?
p.s. Funny you should mention Anne Rice / Menmoch the Devil.. I just finished reading Blackwood Farm...
I think the light, dark metaphor is OK for poetic discussion but light and dark can be detected by machinery, by simple animals and even by plants. Evil and good are merely a relative adjective to describe people's actions. In many questions in life there is no right or wrong answer.
As you said every action has an equal opposite reaction, but as Einstein said all things (even time) are relative and can only be measured in comparison with another.
Lord Nikon
16-12-2003, 14:32
ahh.. but how would you detect light if there was no dark? where would your comparison come from?
Yeah of course God knew, but isn't the whole story about Job(e) having to make the choice, and the Devil to understand that he accepts that there will be bad times among the good.
But couldn't god have just said "look, I've run the simulation, I know the future, Job will accept there will be bad times amongst the good and still worship me, take my word for it, we don't actually have to do anything bad to the guy"
Where in the bible does it say god gave satan free choice that the other angels didn't? Or did satan develope that himself? Or is it not mentioned at all?
Why do I always take so long to spot these topics? :D
Here's what I think, not quoting anyone in particular but trying to cover the main points I've spotted ... 'what I think' is as usual from a Christian point of view, please forgive me if my answers sound a little definitive and certain for your tastes.
What is evil?
The Christian concept of good and evil is not analagous with the Buddhist one. They are not opposites; 'Good' (or, 'holy') is a perfect standard, and 'evil' is anything that falls short of that standard. The Buddhist concept ascribes good and evil an equal but opposite influence, such that they balance each other out. The Christian perspective says that God is the standard by which everything else is judged. He is perfectly good and as creator and sustainer of the Universe is also omnipotent. Therefore anyone/anything who is less holy than God is, to some degree at least, evil; also whoever that person/force, he/it is less powerful than God.
Who is the Devil?
I heard some of the Radio 4 programme the other day (I was late for work, so heard it only from 9am until a few minutes past) but I heard enough to get the opening statements and understand a little of where the contributors were coming from. The thing that interested me about one of them was their assertion that our understanding of the Devil has changed, and that the Devil portrayed in the early books of the Bible (Job may be the oldest after Genesis) is different to the latest books (Revelation being one of the most recent). This point of view shows scant regard for the general principle that the Bible is a progressive revelation of spiritual things and therefore what is said in the early parts of it is not wrong or different, but merely incomplete. A true understanding of Satan can only be gained by reading everything the Bible says about him. This is true of any Christian doctrine. Those who base their theology on one or two proof-texts are the ones that usually end up founding cults (the JWs being a classic case in point, but that's off topic).
Satan was once an Archangel called Lucifer, with a particular ministry relating to things musical. The other Archangels are Gabriel, associated with messages of peace (e.g. the Christmas story) and Michael, who often appears with warnings of war and judgement. Lucifer led a rebellion against God, along with about a third of the angels in Heaven, and was cast out as a result.
What is the extent of Satan's power?
He had, and has, the gift of self determination, as do we, however God is omnipotent and ultimately all self-determination is limited by God's overall plan for the Universe. Drawing the line between our free choice and God's will is fraught with difficulty. The true position needs to recognise both the ability of created beings to obey or disobey, but also God's sovreignty. Satan, desiring to make himself God, led the rebellion and lost. Cast out as a twisted and evil spiritual being, he walks the Earth attempting to take it out on God vicariously by attacking his people. He attempts to continue the argument with God that 'Satan knows better than God' by casting aspersions on God's people and demanding the right to prove his point. Despite everything, he cannot act without God's permission, hence the first couple of chapters of Job. God allows Satan to assault Job not in order to settle a bet with the Devil, but because God sees outside of time and knows that the ultimate outcome will be beneficial to Job's eternal soul. God is not constrained by our limited point of view and will allow things to happen which he knows are ultimately for the best. In this sense, Satan acted off his own bat, yet simultaneously was God's instrument in dealing with Job. Only someone like God, with an eternal perspective and able to see the end from the beginning, could act in this way and yet remain absolutely righteous and holy. Taking a chance on the outcome would be very irresponsible indeed.
In the New Testament, Satan is a 'prowling lion' seeking to devour the Faithful, and this is sometimes held up as a contrast with the Satan who approaches God regarding Job. There is no necessary contrast here. In one instance, Paul talks about 'handing over to Satan' a Christian whose conduct has been persistently wide of the mark in order that he learn a lesson. Therefore, in the authority of God, Paul 'uses' Satan in the same way God himself did. Spiritually, the protection from the evil one is lifted so Satan is allowed to attack, the intention being that the one afflicted will come to his senses and return repentant to the fold. Elsewhere, Paul himself talks about an 'affliction' he suffers, describing it as 'a minister of Satan' sent to trouble him. He has asked God to remove it, but God's reply is that 'My grace is sufficient for you'. God wants Paul to learn to rely more fully on divine strength rather than his own, which is not up to the task of withstanding the Devil.
I'm going to stop here as I'm getting carried away ...
downquark1
16-12-2003, 17:21
ahh.. but how would you detect light if there was no dark? where would your comparison come from?
How do you know there is a difference? Your eye tells you, you notice when it is light. You can then say one thing is lighter than another (to the human extent).
Good and evil are actions, there is no organ to tell you what is good and bad (unless you believe in a birth-defined conse-unsh (can't spell)). It depends entirely on what you take as a guide. The Bible tells you what is good and what is bad, but it doesn't really quanitify. It says the act homosexuallity is evil, but what if a homosexual gave money to charity, saved someones life and healed the sick? Is he good or evil? You can only say he is better than a homosexual who didn't do those things.
But in Hinduism there is nothing shameful about homosexuality. In some ancient greek militaries homosexuallity was considered a good thing (something about motivation to help your lover). A child with a sense of hygene would find every sexual act disgusting.
During WWI conscientious objectors were considered shamed cowards - some today consider them heros. Soldiers were considered heros, would God consider them murderers?
Some people say abortions are murder but euthanasia is OK. A Muslim would say both are wrong
Some people say wearing fur is wrong but eating animals is OK. A hindu would say both are wrong
In 1800 slavery was considered OK. Today employment is considered OK. A communist would agree with neither.
If I were to put a pen on my in my pocket here, nothing would happen - if I were to put a pen in my pocket on jupiter, the pen would rip through my body. It all depends on the 'laws' that apply.
Towny don't go!
I like your input :)
Where in the bible does it talk about lucifer's war?
Towny don't go!
I like your input :)
Where in the bible does it talk about lucifer's war?
In Revelation chapter 12, vv7-9:
And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, and prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
(King James Version)
When in the history of the bible did this occur? I mean was it during the book of genisis, or later?
When in the history of the bible did this occur? I mean was it during the book of genisis, or later?
I'm glad you asked that :D
The 'chronology' of Revelation is a very tricky one. As I've said in the past, I don't necessarily subscribe to the fairly literal interpretation that leads to the much-discussed seven year tribulation prior to Jesus' return.
That aside, there are two views that I find attractive. In both of them, Satan's rebellion occurs prior to the creation of the Earth.
In the first, Satan's banishment happened at the time of his rebellion. A verse that could support that is:
And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven. (Luke 10:18, King James Version)
i.e. Jesus, speaking in about 30AD, is saying he saw an event that happened in the past, while he was in Heaven, prior to his incarnation.
However, an alternative explanation is that although Satan's rebellion occurred before the foundation of Earth, his exile from God's presence was secured by Jesus' death on the Cross. This allows for the fact that Satan appears in God's presence to accuse Job in the Old Testament, something that is not consistent with him having been 'cast to Earth' as described in Revelation.
This is the explanation I tend to favour. Although Jesus is described as 'the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world' and his death is designed to be an atoning sacrifice effective throughout the whole of history (both before and after his Earthly ministry), there are certain things that could not happen until this actual point in history - the gift of the holy spirit to all believers, for example.
The Bible says that Jesus was granted the seat at God's right hand following his ascension back to Heaven. JWs say this is evidence that Jesus has a greater status now than he had before coming to Earth, therefore proving that he is not God. However the position at God's right hand is symbolic of the authority as an Advocate for men to God that he earned by his obedience and sacrifice. In earning it, he takes the place of the devil. Previously, Satan was allowed access to God's presence in order to accuse people. Now, Jesus is in God's presence acting as Advocate.
The apparently past-tense statement of Jesus that he witnessed Satan's demise need only mean that, prior to his incarnation as a man, he dwelt in heaven where there is no time, and from where God can see the whole sweep of events from start to finish. Old Testament prophets frequently use a form of past tense to refer to future events they have 'seen'.
Is revellations the only book which mentions the rebellion?
Is revellations the only book which mentions the rebellion?
I'm sure it's mentioned in Luke too.
(Sorry for not replying for a day or so, work is nuts :) )
I'm sure it's mentioned in Luke too.
(Sorry for not replying for a day or so, work is nuts :) )
Luke - Rebellion - Have you been watching star wars again? :D
Y'know, people have drawn parallels, with Luke being Jesus, satan being Palpatine, R2-D2 being.......John the Baptist....erm....ok maybe not.
Is revellations the only book which mentions the rebellion?
I'll have to do some digging, but I believe this is the only explicit reference, yes. The verse I quoted in Luke alludes to it, but you wouldn't be able to read all that into Luke if you didn't have Revelation as well. Why you should read the whole Bible, y'see. :)
Also this ties in with what I was saying about the Bible being an incomplete revelation until .... well, Revelation was written. By the time the Old Testament was completed, the Jews had all they needed to obey God in the way he required until the Messiah came. Now the New Testament is complete, we have all we need to obey God until he comes again. The Christian's status as a 'spiritual warrior' is far more significant than was the case for the Jews, so the Bible ensures we have a more sophisticated understanding of our enemy.
EDIT:
Mrs towny comes up trumps - two Old Testament prophecies talk about Satan being cast out of Heaven:-
You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created, until unrighteousness was found in you ... And you sinned ..Therefore I have cast you as profane from the mountain of God ... I cast you to the ground. (Ezekiel 28:11-19)
How you have fallen from Heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the Earth. (Isaiah 14:12)
Remember these are prophesies and may well point to a future event despite the apparent use of the past tense in English (scholars call this use of apparently past tense in Hebrew the 'prophetic perfect' tense, and it has no equivalent in English. The King James version of the Ezekiel passage uses a future tense.)
Meanwhile Jude vs 6 talks about rebellious angels being kept chained up ready for judgment:
And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
A further illustration of Satan standing at God's right hand in the Old Testament is in Zechariah 3:1 :-
And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him.
It's interesting how the devil has been portrayed changes then, from someone who is there testing us (Job) or trying to tempt us (Jesus) on god's behalf, into someone who wants to overthrow god.
It's interesting how the devil has been portrayed changes then, from someone who is there testing us (Job) or trying to tempt us (Jesus) on god's behalf, into someone who wants to overthrow god.
But I don't think he does change at all. His motives and character have been consistent, but the Bible's revelation of that is progressive. The way the Bible is written, if nothing else, dictates that our understanding of any Christian doctrine must have been a progressive one. The book was written in three languages, in a dozen or more countries, by dozens of people, over a period of some 2 or 3,000 years.
Satan was a tempter and a rebel from the very beginning - acting through the serpent in the Garden of Eden, he questioned God's word and his moral authority:
"Did God really say you must not eat from any tree in the garden?" (Genesis 3:1)
"You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman, "for God knows that when you eat of it, your eyes will be open, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." (Genesis 3:4-5)
Interesting
"You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman, "for God knows that when you eat of it, your eyes will be open, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." (Genesis 3:4-5)
He's not lying there is he? Eve didn't die instantly (ok the JW's would reply "ah but she did die eventially, at several hundred years old"), and they were like god in knowing good and evil.
It is that act, enlightening humans, opening our eyes, which some people are grateful to him for.
Of course the devil could use that line "he made me do it" in that god must have known that the devil would do such a thing, and therefore as he made the devil, he made him do it (now that would be an interesting court case!), if angels didn't have freedom of choice, and it's all part of gods plan...
Interesting
He's not lying there is he? Eve didn't die instantly (ok the JW's would reply "ah but she did die eventially, at several hundred years old"), and they were like god in knowing good and evil.
It is that act, enlightening humans, opening our eyes, which some people are grateful to him for.
Of course the devil could use that line "he made me do it" in that god must have known that the devil would do such a thing, and therefore as he made the devil, he made him do it (now that would be an interesting court case!), if angels didn't have freedom of choice, and it's all part of gods plan...
The devil was lying; the only kind of death that God has ever ultimately been concerned about is the spiritual 'death' that is separation from him. Adam and Eve suffered that the moment they disobeyed.
Plus, I don't believe the Bible says anywhere that angels have no free choice. Clearly they do, or else a whole load of them would not have been able to rebel with Satan.
The devil was lying; the only kind of death that God has ever ultimately been concerned about is the spiritual 'death' that is separation from him. Adam and Eve suffered that the moment they disobeyed.
Plus, I don't believe the Bible says anywhere that angels have no free choice. Clearly they do, or else a whole load of them would not have been able to rebel with Satan.
But that wasn't specified, the only death humans are interested in is the end of life.
Seperation from god is seperation from god, not death.
But that wasn't specified, the only death humans are interested in is the end of life.
Seperation from god is seperation from god, not death.
To millions, that is one and the same thing.
Death is not the end of life but the start of life with God
What your eyes show you is only the surface of reality,look deeper
To millions, that is one and the same thing.
To billions it's not tho.
I am seperated from god and could never worship him even if he came and sat next to me on the sofa.
He doesn't deserve my respect let alone devotion.
So to me, and billions of others, death means no longer alive.
Seperation from god could also mean freedom :)
But that wasn't specified, the only death humans are interested in is the end of life.
Seperation from god is seperation from god, not death.
You're arguing your point in the English language and loading it with your own cultural assumptions and understandings. Despite the popularity of postmodern interpretive theories which say to the contrary, the true interpretation has to come from the understanding of the culture that wrote it down, not the culture that is reading it x,000 year later. Trust me, discussion of 'death' in this context in the Bible always means spiritual separation from God.
In any case, part of the reason for the Bible is to encourage people to think beyond the end of their noses. If all they are concerned with is physical death ... well, they shouldn't be. True 'death', to be 'dead to God' and eternally separated from him, is far worse. I believe this holds true even for those who in this life give good reasons why they could never respect God. I believe this because I'm convinced that a glimpse of God in all his glory, and the eternal paradise he has prepared for us, would be enough to torment anyone who was then not allowed to live in it. :(
But was he being evil and adversarial towards god or simply carrying out god's bidding?
I mean, would adam and eve have eaten the fruit if he handn't tempted them?
But that brings up the whole ineffible plan of god, in that if he didn't want them to eat the fruit, why put it there in the first place?
As for whether people like myself who feel even if god did exist (to us) we still couldn't respect/worship him, I think that's best left to another thread (god - saviour or genocidal tyrant?)
downquark1
18-12-2003, 09:59
Did anyone watch that "Bedtime" drama? some religious issues about the devil were mentioned there.
But was he being evil and adversarial towards god or simply carrying out god's bidding?
I mean, would adam and eve have eaten the fruit if he handn't tempted them?
But that brings up the whole ineffible plan of god, in that if he didn't want them to eat the fruit, why put it there in the first place?
As for whether people like myself who feel even if god did exist (to us) we still couldn't respect/worship him, I think that's best left to another thread (god - saviour or genocidal tyrant?)
People were designed for a relationship with God. For any relationship to be meaningful it has to be freely chosen on both sides. (This is the difference between angels and humans - angels were created for service, people were created for fellowship). God would certainly have been presiding over a tyrrany had people been forced to 'love' him without any say in the matter.
So, to allow them the ability to choose to obey or to disobey, the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was made off-limits to Adam and Eve. This is not because God did not want his people to have knowledge. It was because they were only children. Because they were made man and woman and not boy and girl, we always assume they were adults, but they weren't. They were naked as the day you were born, and didn't know that there was anything odd about it. They were absolutely innocent, in all but physical appearance, they were children and it was God's plan to teach them himself if they would obey him.
However, the devil came along and tempted Eve. He convinced her to do the one thing God had said she could not do, and she ate fruit from the Tree. Adam was with her, and his sin was if anything even worse - he knew it was wrong too, and the serpent hadn't even been targeting him. He chose to follow Eve instead of God. Adam and Eve immediately realised they were naked. God, finding them hiding in the garden, asked them about this and 'deduced' that they had eaten from the Tree - not because he needed to ask in order to know, but because he knows people don't have his eternal perspective and he wants to talk to them at their level. When he banished them from the garden, he made them some clothes. As I said, he never intended them to remain naked. He intended them to learn to wear clothes.
The Tree of Knowledge represented the ability of the human race to freely choose or reject what God offered. Remember, the Tree of Life was also in the garden, and there was no restriction on eating from it. Had Adam and Eve eaten its fruit, they would have lived forever. After they became sinful people, God placed an angel on guard next to it in order to prevent this happening.
Satan behaved consistently according to his known character and intentions in tempting Eve. His aim was to spoil God's plan, although he merely ended up playing a part in an event God had forseen. It would be ludicrous to suggest that God intended Eve to give in to the temptation, when he also knew that he himself would have to pay a very high price indeed as a result. What we're wrestling with here is how we, as finite creatures limited by time and space, can understand the mind of the one who both invented time and space and also lives outside of it. The fact that God knew what the outcome would be does not in any way lessen Eve's free will in the situation, or her personal responsibility for her wrongdoing. Satan's involvement does not absolve her from her sin either. God allowed Satan to be in the garden, or else he would not have been there - but Satan's presence in the garden did not inevitably mean that events would unfold as they did. Would they have eaten the fruit had the devil not been there? I don't know. Perhaps the Devil was allowed into the garden in order to make the case for the opposition. To be honest, I'm not sure how relevant that is. Whatever the reason, Eve had a choice.
So god's an irresponsible parent as well then? :D
If they were children why not hold off placing the death bringing tree until they were mature enough to be ready for it?
Would you let a cobra into your child's bedroom knowing that it might cause them death?
So god's an irresponsible parent as well then? :D
If they were children why not hold off placing the death bringing tree until they were mature enough to be ready for it?
Would you let a cobra into your child's bedroom knowing that it might cause them death?
I don't think the analogy works very well - a cobra has the ability to kill all by iteslf, without the child having to say or do anything. Satan had no power to hurt Eve. He made a simple, verbal case for disobeying God, but then God's initial command to Adam and Eve was no more complicated than the instructions we expect even very young children to follow - a simple 'don't!'
On the other hand, I may have over-stressed the child-like nature of Adam and Eve. Although essentially a child, he was able to discuss his ideal partner with God and name all the animals, so clearly his ability to think and communicate was somewhat better than a newborn baby or a toddler.
It is a connundrum.
If you look at the bible as the writings of some wise men who were trying to answer questions like "how did we get here?" "why did we get here?" "where are we going?" you can expect certain flaws, or rather omisions where they didn't think of the questions we're asking. They'd just say "genisis" and the listeners would reply "Ah, genisis, that explains it, great, I'll go back to work then now you've answered that"
If you look at the bible as the word of god given to man, then you can be left with the unpalatable question "can god make mistakes?"
Now if you can't accept god can make mistakes (don't remember the bible saying he can or can't) then what happened must be all part of his plan, even if his plan is simply to let us do what we like (so that gets round the "he must have put the devil there to tempt eve")
Why people don't think he could make mistakes, I don't know (oh fiddlestix I'm going of topic and I so don't want to) but there you go, they don't.
But imagine if he was able to make mistakes, perhaps he made a mistake in putting the tree there, or perhaps he made a mistake in letting lucifer into the garden. (if only you could see me floundering as I try to think of a way to bring this back on topic)
Anyway, the devil, yes, him, are there any descriptions of him in the bible?
It is a connundrum. <snip>
If you look at the bible as the word of god given to man, then you can be left with the unpalatable question "can god make mistakes?"
<snip>
I apply this logic to it: If God can see not only every possible outcome of a decision he makes, but also the actual outcome, and all the knock-on effects, such that he is fully aware of absolutely everything that was ever going to happen, then the question of whether he can make a mistake is redundant. (For example, in a Coroner's court, the verdict 'Accident' is defined as the unforseen outcome of a deliberate act). You have to believe that he intended - or accepted - everything that was going to unfold.
Additionally, as I said in an earlier post, in Christian theology, 'good' and 'bad' are not abstract concepts against which even God is judged. God is good, therefore whatever God says or does is good.
(if only you could see me floundering as I try to think of a way to bring this back on topic)
Flounder? You? Never. :D ;)
Anyway, the devil, yes, him, are there any descriptions of him in the bible?
Direct and unambiguous physical descriptions? Not really. There are plenty of decriptions of his character and nature and some symbolic descriptions of what he is like. But I'm off for a screen break and a breath of fresh air just now ... I'll be back later! :wavey:
<snip>
Anyway, the devil, yes, him, are there any descriptions of him in the bible?
how about this lot ;) http://www.searchgodsword.org/con/ntb/view.cgi?number=T4266
Additionally, as I said in an earlier post, in Christian theology, 'good' and 'bad' are not abstract concepts against which even God is judged. God is good, therefore whatever God says or does is good.
That's a dangerous thing, it could lead someone to argue that as god has comitted genocide, then to do the same is also good.
Of course you could counter with saying that god's genocide of those people at that point in time was good.
Now, I know we have some muslims on the forum, or ex-muslims, how about telling us of Shaitan?
s1lv3r darn if I knew that site existed I could have saved a fiver on a bible :D
That's a dangerous thing, it could lead someone to argue that as god has comitted genocide, then to do the same is also good.
Of course you could counter with saying that god's genocide of those people at that point in time was good.
It would only be dangerous if someone chose to ignore the reasons why God chose to obliterate entire cities (such as Sodom and Gomorrah), which are frequently explained in the Bible right alongside the description of their demise. God judges sinful behaviour. His love and patience delays judgement to allow for repentance, but not indefinitely. In the age we live in, his love and patience is allowing the world to respond to what he did as described in the New Testament, but the time will come when justice must be satisfied. In the Old Testament, Jonah's trip to Nineveh (via the belly of a large fish) was instructed by God so that he could warn the inhabitants to change their ways. (In fact, in this instance the people of Nineveh did change their ways, and the last part of the book of Jonah is a tragic (almost comically so) account of how angry Jonah was that, having travelled all that way, he didn't even get to enjoy watching God smite people at the end of it.)
Now, I know we have some muslims on the forum, or ex-muslims, how about telling us of Shaitan?
I would find this very interesting, but our members of other faiths seldom say much about it on nthw. I wish they would.
s1lv3r darn if I knew that site existed I could have saved a fiver on a bible :D
I didn't know about that site, but it does look like a good one. Another useful one is: http://www.blueletterbible.org/
It would only be dangerous if someone chose to ignore the reasons why God chose to obliterate entire cities (such as Sodom and Gomorrah), which are frequently explained in the Bible right alongside the description of their demise. God judges sinful behaviour. His love and patience delays judgement to allow for repentance, but not indefinitely. In the age we live in, his love and patience is allowing the world to respond to what he did as described in the New Testament, but the time will come when justice must be satisfied. In the Old Testament, Jonah's trip to Nineveh (via the belly of a large fish) was instructed by God so that he could warn the inhabitants to change their ways. (In fact, in this instance the people of Nineveh did change their ways, and the last part of the book of Jonah is a tragic (almost comically so) account of how angry Jonah was that, having travelled all that way, he didn't even get to enjoy watching God smite people at the end of it.)
I think I will come back to that in my next theological thread, hopefully it'll be a doozy :)
I would find this very interesting, but our members of other faiths seldom say much about it on nthw. I wish they would.
Well after the bible, I'm gonna have to read the third holy book then aren't I? (excluding the book of mormon)
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.