|
Post by yeshuafreak on Aug 14, 2009 5:25:05 GMT -8
why would god keep him in heaven after he was fallen?
and ddi not Jesus say "i see satan falling forom heaven a s of lightning?" this suggests, if you take it literally, that it was done then, as Jesus saw it.
shalom- john
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 14, 2009 11:48:11 GMT -8
I don't know, but Scripture says he did:
Ephesians 6:12
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.
I see the reference here to heaven/ heavenly realms not as "the abode of the departed" but as a certain level, plane, or dimension of "spiritual existence".
So, I see Jesus remark in the Gospel about seeing satan fall as a reference to satan being demoted in some way from a higher level, plane, or dimension of spiritual existence (most likely due to the outbreaking of the kingdom of God through the ministry of the 72 disciples Jesus sent out in Luke 10).
This corresponds to John's allusion to Daniel 12:1 in Revelation 12:7-9- that at sometime around or near Jesus' birth, life, and resurrection, and the fleeing of the church from Jerusalem summarized in Rev. 12:1-6, there would be such a war "in the heavenlies" in which satan would "lose his place in heaven" and be decisively "kicked out" to vent his fury for a short while through the Jewish war and the Neronian persecution before being consigned to the abyss for the millenium.
(Obviously I hold to amillenial/ partial preterist views on eschatology, but I'm trying to show you the biblical progression of my chain of logic)
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Aug 23, 2009 13:20:54 GMT -8
wowo- thats really allegorizing scripture. you will have to write your views on revelation (just skimming them) and i will write my views on imine. then i will give a rebutal to yours. for i know that i do not agree, and then you can do the same. in fact, i urge you to do the same.
shalom- john
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Aug 23, 2009 19:01:11 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by yeshuafreak on Aug 24, 2009 13:00:50 GMT -8
meaning, it is less literal than the views i usually hear. i will comment.i have gotten a bit rusty concerning eschatology.
shalom- john
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Feb 21, 2010 19:28:43 GMT -8
Robin,
I'm curious your thoughts on this. I wasn't really able to ascertain your perspective on this today (limited time, etc..) but I'm curious.
|
|
|
Post by robin on Feb 25, 2010 8:39:30 GMT -8
I'm not ignoring this thread. When I have time to read through what has already been written, I will post my thoughts. Sorry for the delay, but things are very hectic right now.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 25, 2010 20:52:54 GMT -8
Okay, Robin (and Chris) as a result of our brief convo on this tonight at Pubagetics, I'd like to pose the following questions:
Are you saying that God purposefully created a being (satan) who by his very nature is a liar?
Can God even create an "evil being"? We are only ever told explicitly in Scripture that all things he created were good (Gen. 1)
Can God rebuke someone who had no choice but to do what he does? (Zech. 3:2)
How can a being who is simply doing what God created Him to do have motivations contrary to God's will? (Mark 8:33)
Can a morally neutral "testing" agent scheme, "outwit", and take people "captive"? (2 Cor. 2:11, 2 Tim. 2:26)
Can a morally neutral "testing" agent be cursed by God (Matt. 25:41) How would that be fair?
Can God punish a being He created that had no free will? (Rev. 20:10)
On another note- please interpret this passage from a non-traditional viewpoint:
1 Timothy 3:6
He must not be a recent convert, or he may become conceited and fall under the same judgment as the devil.
How can the devil be conceited (a sin) and judged for it if he had no free will?
|
|
|
Post by christopher on May 26, 2010 17:19:42 GMT -8
I never took a position one way or another on this, so I'll let Robin take this one. I do have a few thoughts on it though. I don't think there's really enough scriptural data to make a definitive decision on it anyways, so I remain neutral (agnostic). I can see the merits and problems in both views. Either way, God is in some way responsible for an evil being we know as Satan being in the world for most of human history. I don't see any way around that. As you already know, my personal theory is that in a world with free will beings, the fall had to happen, and creation redeemed, in order for "goodness" to be perfected. I don't think God was taken off-guard here. you wrote: We're told a great many things with absolute sounding language in scripture that obviously cannot be. It's called hyperbole. I don't think this makes your case. Besides, maybe Satan had not been created at this point, hmm?. Mark 4:39 39 Then He arose and rebuked the wind, and said to the sea, "Peace, be still!" NKJV Using the 2nd most symbolic book in the bible is not necessarily air tight by the way. Um, he's talking to Peter here, not Satan (which is merely a word that means "adversary"). Some feel Satan will be simply annihilated when he's no longer needed. Again, you quote a passage in the most symbolic book in the bible. I don't think we can simply assume to take it literally. Where does it say the devil was conceited? Check the original language. The word "judgment" and "same" aren't there. The passage could just as easily be, and often is, translated: "lest he fall into the condemnation of the devil"parallel this with a verse later where it says the overseer can fall into " snare of the devil" and I think a good case could be made that it's not talking about Satan's judgment at all, but his traps.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 26, 2010 17:45:48 GMT -8
From your perspective, what do you think are the problems with the traditional Christian view (other than ascribing the Isaiah and Ezekiel passages to satan) Is God responsible for the rapists and murderers? Yes only in the sense that he allowed them free will. No in every other sense. Does something make you think I'd disagree with this? Often when you use this argument it sounds as is you equate "symbolic" with "indechiperable" I don't think he's talking merely to Peter. I see this similarly as when "satan" entered Judas. Gotta go for now... more later...
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 26, 2010 20:20:10 GMT -8
Regarding Rev. 20:10,
And the devil, who deceived them, was thrown into the lake of burning sulfur, where the beast and the false prophet had been thrown. They will be tormented day and night for ever and ever,
you said:
.
Regardless of how we translate "for ever and ever", it would not be fair of God to torment someone (or allow someone to be tormented) for doing/ being something he could not have helped. How would you interpret "torment" any other way?
In other words, set aside questions of ECT/ Annihiliation/ Universalism. It's still clear that satan will be punished.
Regarding 1 Timothy 3:6, you said:
It's true, Young's literal says: not a new convert, lest having been puffed up he may fall to a judgment of the devil;
although it seems odd to attribute judgment or condemnation to the devil.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 26, 2010 20:27:10 GMT -8
On a related note, if demons are to be said to be like satan, and merely "testers" send by God, then why are demons likewise judged and punished by God for something they cannot help, but were rather sent to do?
(Luke 8:30-32)
Why do the demons shudder at the thought of God (James 2:19) if they are merely his servants?
And what about 2 Peter 2:4 which clearly says that some angels have sinned and have been judged (again, only possible with free will):
For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell, putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment;
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 26, 2010 20:29:00 GMT -8
You also realize that the books of Enoch taught this idea of satan and some of the angels falling, right? That was part of the worldview Jesus and the early Christians stepped into and they didn't challenge or correct it, but seemed to accept it.
|
|
|
Post by christopher on May 26, 2010 21:33:15 GMT -8
Josh wrote: Only that there's no evidence that he was created to be a "good angel" and fell. In fact there's evidence to the contrary. If we're to contrast the following passages with what you said about "all things" being created good, we'd have to conclude there's a contradiction if we press all things absolute sounding... John 8:44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. NKJV
1 John 3:88 He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has sinned from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil.NKJV
(This passage also helps my theory about the fall being necessary so it can be redeemed. ) Well, we really don't know that do we? We generally assume it, but there's no telling. I mean, He does have the power, and presumably the foreknowledge to take them out whenever He wishes. Perhaps there is a reason to have tempters and testers for mankind around, whether it be in the form of Satan or humans influenced by him. That's never been my meaning. Only that there is much less footing for dogma in such passages. It's ok to have our theories, but I think we should be careful about holding on to firmly to them. I not uncomfortable with allowing one of several possibilities to true, and letting it remain a mystery in some cases. Tenable theory, but you have to bring that assumption to the passage because it doesn't say that. At face value, it could easily be taken to mean Peter is Jesus' adversary when he attempts to thwart the plans of God...namely Jesus' death. Well, perhaps. But it's not conclusive that the "they" in this passage is referring to the devil, what if it only means the beast and the false prophet? By the way, what is your view of the beast and the false prophet of Revelation? Are they individuals in your view? Many view them as systems of government and religion. How will they be tormented? Also, personification of non-personal things is very common to this book. Even in this chapter we see: ....the earth and the heaven fled away(v11) The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them (v13). There's no reason "tormenting" Satan has to mean literal tormenting. Why? Every time you succumb to sin, you fall into the condemnation of the devil, that is... the condemnation the devil seduces you into in other words. Who has said that?
|
|
|
Post by robin on May 27, 2010 6:34:54 GMT -8
It appears that you both have been busy while I was away. Unfortunately my input may have to wait until after the backpacking trip. As you know I'm taking off tonight and my day schedule is a little busy. However, You and I can talk about this when you show up on Friday, if we find the time.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on May 27, 2010 18:40:39 GMT -8
Yep- I'm gonna have to respond after the backpacking trip.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jun 8, 2010 17:06:18 GMT -8
But that's what I'm arguing- that a comprehensive survey of Scripture plus some sound logic provides us all the evidence we need. Granted, I cannot prove from Genesis 1alone that God only created "good things", but Genesis 1 in conjunction with God's character as revealed throughout Scripture makes the suggestion that He deliberately created something evil the weaker position imo. As to these verses, they need of course only mean since the beginning of human history. I think I'm not being clear about what I mean by "responsible". I do believe that God uses all things (even those things that He is not directly responsible for) for His good. But another way to say what I was trying to say is that God doesn't create "rapists". He creates people that can then choose to become rapists. I think this logic applies to all of his creation, and think the evidence is in favor of this. Okay, how about a much clearer passage that says the same thing? John 16:7-11 7But I tell you the truth: It is for your good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8When he comes, he will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment: 9in regard to sin, because men do not believe in me; 10in regard to righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; 11and in regard to judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned. Again, God cannot condemn a person who had no choice but to be evil. I don't understand your response here. Apparently you must entertain a distinct idea of what demons are (as opposed to satan). What would that idea be?
|
|