Was God creating Satan a good idea?

@Leadfoot,

How does one have free will in heaven?

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

How does one have free will in heaven?

I doubt your question was serious but I'll pretend it was.

The same way one has free will now. I have the free will now to do anything within my power. If I chose to, I could take an assault weapon and mow down dozens of people at the nearest shopping mall. That's how free we are.

In heaven, we are granted much more power. We will have access to the equivalent of 'personal atomic weapons' if we wished. And they could be deployed with mere thought, a pretty scary prospect.

That's actually the purpose of the 1000 years (Millennium) currently under discussion. It is a period where your understanding and acceptance of the nature God created you in is demonstrated and tested. Not all will pass.

For example. there are millions of people alive now who say they follow Jesus but they would blow my head off with a celestial cannon if they knew my beliefs.

So that is why there has to be an extensive (1000 years apparently) vetting process to make sure you could be trusted with both power and free will.

Hope that makes sense. Or at least an interesting story.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Then, it's human to sin. So, heaven will be full of sinners too! LOL

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Leadfoot wrote:

. . . You aren't following the train of thought here Neo. There is no argument that Satan has free rein now (with exceptions noted). That's the point! During the 1000 years, Satan DOESN'T have free reign. That's why it is an invalid comparison and man could make the claim I stated.

By the end of the 1000 years, the world will be restored to a pristine state. I see no way that could happen with Satan still in control. He will have his chance at the end.

Leadfoot wrote:

Of course all will hear his voice and rise from the grave (per John 5:28). But not at the same time. I don't memorize chapter and verse but I'm sure you know the bible says 'the dead in Christ will rise first'. The rest will be raised after the 1000 years in my reading.

You don't need to memorize. Look it up. It's 1 Thessalonians 4:16 and refers to those who will serve as kings and priests - prophesied in Exodus 19:6 - revealed in Revelation 5:10 (although mentioned a few times in between)

Leadfoot wrote:

God's sovereignty is hardly the issue being demonstrated in the 1000 years. In fact if that were the issue, man could justify saying "Why the **** didn't you stop all this **** 6000 years ago?".

Other issues - not the least is man's integrity.

Leadfoot wrote:

Of course God is sovereign, that will be obvious to anyone raised from the dead if they didn't already know it before. Why do you think it would take 1000 years to convince anyone? If we are that thick I'd incenerate the lot of us if I were God.

Me too. But that would be an admission of failure.

Leadfoot wrote:

There has to be a better explanation for the purpose of the 1000 years.

Hopefully, when all is said and done, we will have figured it all out.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Then, it's human to sin. So, heaven will be full of sinners too! LOL

Um, No. At he end of the vetting process, there will be no 'sinners'. Only those 'born again' will be left. As the book says, to enter the kingdom of God you must be born again.

I'm way too sleepy now to explain that more fully but I doubt you'd care anyway.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

I really don't care. The facts are logical and simple. Free will means that man will 'sin.' Human crime is a natural trait. All races and cultures have police and prisons, because it's natural for man to commit crime.
All races and cultures have been engaged in wars. That's because it's a human trait; it's natural - or nature.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

I really don't care. The facts are logical and simple. Free will means that man will 'sin.' Human crime is a natural trait. All races and cultures have police and prisons, because it's natural for man to commit crime.
All races and cultures have been engaged in wars. That's because it's a human trait; it's natural - or nature.

True to date. But not part of God's purpose. Sin originated with Adam's choice to know good and bad. When he made that decision, he left behind the perfect conscience of his creation and exchanged it for human guesswork.
See Romans 5:12

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

I understand your angle Infra, but free will is not the same as unlimited will. Did God infringe upon our free will by implementing gravity or by forcing us to orbit the sun?

We are beset by boundaries, and the question at hand here is, who has the right to set our boundaries. If you believe that we should, then what more right does a parent have for stopping a child from crossing the road?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

I really don't care.

That's what I've been saying. So why bother yourself with these whacky theist threads?

Unless maybe you really do care....

Quote:

The facts are logical and simple. Free will means that man will 'sin.' Human crime is a natural trait. All races and cultures have police and prisons, because it's natural for man to commit crime.
All races and cultures have been engaged in wars. That's because it's a human trait; it's natural - or nature.

You see it that way because it's easier to throw up your hands and not meet the challenge. 'Losing your religion' is easier than seeing it's flaws.

Those that haven't 'lost their religion' agree with you but see the problem as one of enforced boundaries. Theirs is the solution in the Beatles song 'Octopus's Garden':

Quote:

I'd like to be under the sea
In an octopus's garden in the shade
He'd let us in, knows where we've been
In his octopus's garden in the shade

It's a form of free will but with the rules enforced by a benevolent dictator. They don't believe we can be redeemed either. They have a form of Godliness but deny the power thereof.

0 Replies

@Leadfoot,

I appreciate your thoughts lead,

Quote:

God's super powers were never in question here. What was in question is the fairness of the comparison/example from the perspective of man.

You overestimate the power of the angel now known as Satan, and underestimate the power of our own free will. We do not need to give him, or his philosophy a place in this world, but man is as corruptible as he is, and that is the point. Satan like man, through his own desire for self importance grasped for power that did not belong to him. That same desire for self importance has been the inclination of man throughout history.

People don't take accountability for their own failures, Adam was the first one to do it, he pointed finger at the woman "God gave him", anything but accept that his mistake came from his own decision to disobey.

What is more, think about Satan's motivation for a second. Satan imposed that man did not need God's guidance. Man could rule his self. Does it make any sense at all for him to add a single ounce of weight to mans failure? Rather, Satan would do all he could to prove his accusation right. Satan does not benefit from hindering mankind, only those that stay loyal to God. Mans failure is Satans failure, his success comes from mans success.

To say that man would do a better job without Satan around is to suggest that man is incorruptible without Satan. I would hazard that is a flawed philosophy. Who corrupted the angel now known as Satan? Were we created less corruptible than he was?

1 Reply

@Smileyrius,

Quote:

To say that man would do a better job without Satan around is to suggest that man is incorruptible without Satan.

Why does this have to be a binary thing? To do better is not to say do perfect. My hypothesis is that the 1000 years purpose is to accomplish that perfection in understanding of 'Everything' (don't know what else to call it). I think once that understanding is achieved, we would be virtually incorruptible. Some call this being 'born again'. BTW, what is your position on that subject?

It almost sounds like you are saying Satan has no influence. You have not yet addressed my question about what the meaning of many joining Satan when he is released, even after living 1000 years under Christ's rule. That alone should be enough to show that he has influence. Or is it that you think the final battle is only between God and Satan?

Quote:

What is more, think about Satan's motivation for a second. Satan imposed that man did not need God's guidance. Man could rule his self. Does it make any sense at all for him to add a single ounce of weight to mans failure? Rather, Satan would do all he could to prove his accusation right.

I see what you're saying here and it may be a good point. Except to make it a level playing field, it would have to be a spectator only event where both God and Satan keep completely 'hands off' mankind.

I don't think that is exactly the scenario. I think the agreed upon arrangement is that neither can do anything physical that might reveal their existence. We accept (?) that God DOES provide us with guidance through his spirit though, so it is only 'fair' that Satan is also allowed 'spiritual guidance' as well.
So what say you, is this a purely spectator sport?

Quote:

Satan does not benefit from hindering mankind, only those that stay loyal to God. Mans failure is Satans failure, his success comes from mans success.

Maybe this is your answer to that last question. Are you saying that Satan only hinders those loyal to God and leaves the rest alone to prove his point? And to compensate for that, God only works with those who ask for his guidance? That would be logically consistent and 'fair' and I would not argue against that. It fits a lot of the evidence in life here. I'm inclined to adopt that as 'the way it is', thanks for that observation.

Quote:

Who corrupted the angel now known as Satan? Were we created less corruptible than he was?

I see what you're saying. Only Satan was responsible for his corruption. The same is true of us.

There remains the question of what 'putting on incorruption' means. Do you think that happens?

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

Why does this have to be a binary thing? To do better is not to say do perfect. My hypothesis is that the 1000 years purpose is to accomplish that perfection in understanding of 'Everything' (don't know what else to call it). I think once that understanding is achieved, we would be virtually incorruptible.

There is no such "understanding." Corruption is a natural outcome of being human. There is no solution for it. That's the reason prisons are full of them.

1 Reply

@neologist,

neologist wrote:

You could always opt out.

Sure, but the whole of mankind will not be able to opt out. It will be forced with harrowing violence upon man for the benefit of a few, according to your dogma.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

There is no such "understanding." Corruption is a natural outcome of being human. There is no solution for it. That's the reason prisons are full of them.

That's a hell of a confession.

If you don't mind, I'll opt out of that one.

0 Replies

@Smileyrius,

Smileyrius wrote:

I understand your angle Infra, but free will is not the same as unlimited will. Did God infringe upon our free will by implementing gravity or by forcing us to orbit the sun?

We are beset by boundaries, and the question at hand here is, who has the right to set our boundaries. If you believe that we should, then what more right does a parent have for stopping a child from crossing the road?

Analogizing God and a child's parents isn't apt because a child's parents didn't grant the child free will.

God granted mankind free will and yet arbitrarily limits mankind's choices in regard to mankind's self-determination.

3 Replies

@InfraBlue,

Beyond "god was created in man's image," there's nothing to compare. Even that is questionable.

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

A little history from page 2 of this thread:

neologist wrote:

. . . If everyone in the world had a built in aversion to wrongdoing, would that be a good thing?

InfraBlue wrote:

By definition it would be a good thing.

neologist wrote:

You could always opt out.

InfraBlue wrote:

Sure, but the whole of mankind will not be able to opt out. It will be forced with harrowing violence upon man for the benefit of a few, according to your dogma.

Where is it said that any will be denied this choice?

1 Reply

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

. . . God granted mankind free will and yet arbitrarily limits mankind's choices in regard to mankind's self-determination.

What choices, in particular, do you believe God unjustly withholds?

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Beyond "god was created in man's image," there's nothing to compare. Even that is questionable.

You claim that neither God nor Satan exists. You don't have a dog in this hunt. And yet you feel compelled to comment. I don't mind, but why do you suppose that is?

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Because you enjoy it? I do too.

1 Reply

Was God creating Satan a good idea?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know