Humans - our part in development

@maxdancona,

That's because the myth has developed over time.

Obviously, most OT books are centuries older than the NT. The oldest OT books are commonly dated to the Babylonian exile, that's be 500 yr BC or something. So they reflect a prior version of the myth, very close to just another god, in which Satan is working for God an adversary to Man.

In the period between the two 'testaments' (200 yr prior to common era) Jewish religious writings (not canonical) tend to become obsessed with apocalyptic thinking. The world is increasingly seen by many Jews as fundamentally evil and in need of some radical salvation. While messianic prophecies proliferate, eg in the Qumran sect, Satan becomes far more that just the "adversary" he was in the past...

Jesus himself calls him by his new title in the Gospel: the Prince of this World. This is the NT version, a view echoed by the gnostic idea of the demiurge: God created the world but for some reason, Satan now rules it as an usurper. Hence God will wage an apocalyptic war against the demons at some point, to redeem his creation, unshering in the Kingdom of God. Kaboom! And our job is to get ready for it.

Evidently, nothing of the sort happened for the past 2000 years... COVID-19 notwithstanding, the end of days are not upon us quite yet. So this idea Jesus had of Satan as an usurper of God and prince of our world had to evolve, and branch out as history and society required. IOW, rare are the Christian who think nowadays that everything in this world is evil and ruled by Satan (=the NT version). Most nowadays would think that Satan rules hell, rather than earth, and occasionally roams earth to fish for souls.

So the myth keeps morphing. To me, these are just new avatars for an old myth...

3 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Obviously, most OT books are centuries older than the NT. The oldest OT books are commonly dated to the Babylonian exile, that's be 500 yr BC or something. So they reflect a prior version of the myth, very close to just another god, in which Satan is working for God an adversary to Man.

When you read these stories, you have to think about them in terms of human writers explaining something that transcends the ability for humans to describe with accuracy. We all know there is good and evil happening and interacting in everyone's life all the time, but how to express it in a way that explains it in way people can relate; and captures the unified nature of the universe as a whole?

Quote:

In the period between the two 'testaments' (200 yr prior to common era) Jewish religious writings (not canonical) tend to become obsessed with apocalyptic thinking. The world is increasingly seen by many Jews as fundamentally evil and in need of some radical salvation. While messianic prophecies proliferate, eg in the Qumran sect, Satan becomes far more that just the "adversary" he was in the past...

The more you study good and evil, the more potential for good you see that goes beyond the status quo of the world, and the more evil you see in the world as it currently exists.

Quote:

Jesus himself calls him by his new title in the Gospel: the Prince of this World. This is the NT version, a view echoed by the gnostic idea of the demiurge: God created the world but for some reason, Satan now rules it as an usurper. Hence God will wage an apocalyptic war against the demons at some point, to redeem his creation, unshering in the Kingdom of God. Kaboom! And our job is to get ready for it.

The war is spiritual. Evil goes on destroying itself because it's evil. We are part of the cycle of destruction, but we learn to forgive and transcend it spiritually, and to pray, "thy will be done on Earth as it is in heaven."

Quote:

Evidently, nothing of the sort happened for the past 2000 years... COVID-19 notwithstanding, the end of days are not upon us quite yet. So this idea Jesus had of Satan as an usurper of God and prince of our world had to evolve, and branch out as history and society required. IOW, rare are the Christian who think nowadays that everything in this world is evil and ruled by Satan (=the NT version). Most nowadays would think that Satan rules hell, rather than earth, and occasionally roams earth to fish for souls.

When it says, "the wages of sin is death," who do you think pays those wages? Whose is the regime of sin and the destruction it causes? There is hell in the hereafter and there is hell on Earth; all sin and the suffering that sin entails.

0 Replies

@livinglava,

You are also stuck in a very Christian-centric point of view.

There is no connection in the Old Testament between the serpent in Genesis, to God's companion in Job.

(God also punished the animal for talking to Eve... which really doesn't seem fair if the serpent was an eternal being rather than the reptilian animal we now call a "snake").

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

That's because the myth has developed over time.

Exactly my point.

And the Original Jewish versions of "Satan" are dramatically different than the Christian one that was developed later. Maybe the Jewish ideas "morphed" after the Talmud was written.... but you don't see this version of Satan in the Old Testament.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Okay but my point is that in the end, it all amounts to the same trick: an injection of polytheism into monotheism, for the purpose of explaining evil while getting God of the hook for it. That is what explains Satan's enduring popularity, whatever the version, its theologic utility in answering: why evil?

In your language, Satan is the polytheist patch that debugs monotheism. There are several versions but they all do more or less the same trick.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

You are also stuck in a very Christian-centric point of view.

You think there is relativism. There is not. Different religions recognize the same sins and the same moral lessons in different ways. You just have to figure out how they express them.

Quote:

There is no connection in the Old Testament between the serpent in Genesis, to God's companion in Job.

The serpent tempted Adam and Eve to disobey God, just as satan was trying to tempt Job into cursing God. Different temptation, same tactic, i.e. temptation.

Quote:

(God also punished the animal for talking to Eve... which really doesn't seem fair if the serpent was an eternal being rather than the reptilian animal we now call a "snake").

I don't know the significance of that part of the story, but it's not any kind of commentary on actual snakes. The serpent represents evil by creeping and being spineless. In Exodus, Moses throws his staff on the ground and it becomes a snake, and I think that is symbolic of the idea that Moses was powerful and thus could command the power of evil if needed to fight for what was right, though I'm not sure about this interpretation.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Christianity prohibits homosexuality. Hinduism celebrates sexuality including same sex and "third sex" sexuality.

What is the underlying moral message?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Christianity prohibits homosexuality. Hinduism celebrates sexuality including same sex and "third sex" sexuality.

What is the underlying moral message?

I don't know, but I don't understand Hinduism very well and people I've talked to who are Hindu say it's misunderstood and the many gods are not really equal to God almighty but more like the different gods of ancient Greek religion. So if you understand the whole Dionysian logic of indulgence to purge desire, it is similar to Carnival before Lent or Halloween before All Saints Day, I think. Ultimately, the logic of Dionysian indulgence was not to make it a permanent way of life but to transcend it, so idk exactly what you're talking about with celebrating sexuality in Hinduism, but if you have first-hand knowledge from someone who practices it and/or something you've read that explains WHY sexuality is celebrated, I could reflect better on how that value corresponds with some Christian values.

The bottom line is all humans want to live well, prosper, gain spiritual happiness/peace, etc. except satanists who want to chase pleasure at the expense of spiritual peace/happiness, value destruction over creation, think heaven is boring and hell is interesting, etc.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Evangelical Christians are always talking about how unique their religion is. It is common theme of discussion both in terms of righteous and in salvation by faith. Jesus Himself talked about the "narrow path".

Anyone who has gone to an Evangelical Sunday school can list off from rote memory all the ways that Christianity is unique (i.e. better) than all of the other religions of the world. In fact, it is cliche in some Evangelical circles to say that "Christianty isn't a religion. It's a relationship."

I have always thought of you as an Evangelical Christian, Lava.... am I wrong about that?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Evangelical Christians are always talking about how unique their religion is. It is common theme of discussion both in terms of righteous and in salvation by faith. Jesus Himself talked about the "narrow path".

Anyone who has gone to an Evangelical Sunday school can list off from rote memory all the ways that Christianity is unique (i.e. better) than all of the other religions of the world. In fact, it is cliche in some Evangelical circles to say that "Christianty isn't a religion. It's a relationship."

I have always thought of you as an Evangelical Christian, Lava.... am I wrong about that?

I do think of Christianity as unique in that St. Paul noted that Jesus died for our sins "while we were yet sinners." So there's really nothing for you to do to accept salvation besides accept that Jesus already died for you.

But Jesus didn't die to save a particular kind of sinners from any particular kind of sins. The question is what constitutes sin and why/how. You could discover some form of sin by studying any religion and that sin would still be forgiven in Christ. It just depends on whether it's really a sin or whether it's some arbitrary rule someone made up to trap you in shame/guilt in order to use you in some way.

0 Replies

@yovav,

Yes.

Have A Lovely Day

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Here is the problem.

- The claim is that if an animal does something "evil", he has no guilt because he doesn't know it is evil.

- Why wouldn't a human being who does something "evil" be free from guilt if as long has he doesn't know it is evil?

Most of you understand of what is "evil" is based on what you were taught. If you weren't taught that something is "evil", then I suppose it wouldn't be "evil" for you.

That is certainly the position taken by the Bible.
He (Paul) said it plainly and in expanded forms. This is paraphrased but accurate. 'For him that does not believe it wrong to eat meat, it is not a sin.'

To expand that approach to its limit the book says:
“ Whatsoever is not of faith, is sin.“

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

I think you are greatly misusing that scripture.

Paul is talking about a very specific issue, whether Gentiles are subject to Jewish religious law. He isn't making general statement about sin.

Your logic would turn the Apostle Paul into an extreme moral relativist, where anything (murder, idolatry, having sex with your sister) would be permissible as long as you don't know it is sin.

Paul isn't making that argument.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

You have plenty of supporters for that opinion.

But that assumes that we are at our core, morally negative or at best, blank slates. That is not what the Bible contends. Unless you think man ended up that way after getting the knowledge of good and evil. I’d imagine that would be a distinct advantage in avoiding those things you feared would happen.

I never got why that story is considered 'the fall of mankind'. It’s counterintuitive to me.

2 Replies

@Leadfoot,

Adam and Eve "fell" because they did not believe God. They believed Satan instead.
You quoted "Whatever is not from faith (in God) is sin. You answered your own question about the fall of man.

1 Reply

@NealNealNeal,

Genesis 3 wrote:

Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made

[ and then...]

“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.

It clearly wasn't Satan. It was a serpent that was one of the wild animals that God made. And God punished the animal as an animal. I don't know why Christians insist on changing what the Bible says.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

The way I read the story, the Fruit gave human beings free will. Before this point, they were incapable of sin.

1 Reply

I think the fruit of knowledge is clearly a symbol for self awareness. Once self aware, man is no longer an animal, and ‘falls’ from a state of animal blissful ignorance and innocence into a state of constant self assessment. At least that seems to be the idea conveyed.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

I don’t know for certain what the fruit metaphor was getting at, but I agree with your conclusion.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

I think the fruit of knowledge is clearly a symbol for self awareness. Once self aware, man is no longer an animal, and ‘falls’ from a state of animal blissful ignorance and innocence into a state of constant self assessment. At least that seems to be the idea conveyed.

That is close enough to my understanding as well. But going further, I think it is apparent (Reading between the lines) that God wanted them to make that choice. Just wanted them to have the choice and to take it seriously. I in their place would have done the same.

1 Reply

Humans - our part in development

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know