quote:

---

This is not the best forum for this question. We are trying to get the name of this forum changed to "Let's confront the reality of evil." ....I would repost this question in the "The Debate Continues" forum.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

This is not the best forum for this question. We are trying to get the name of this forum changed to "Let's confront the reality of evil." ....I would repost this question in the "The Debate Continues" forum.

---

Huge, dlw is on a noble quest to create more order. Until such order emerges or is imposed or whatever, you can put your post whenever you want. Welcome to our discussion.

adiaphora

---

quote:

---

DLW, forgive me for posting in the wrong forum. I will try to better understand my bearings before doing so again. Though I am not French, I consider myself a descendent of the Huguenots in other ways.

---

That must mean you are a trouble-maker. For a good film depicting St. Bartholomew's day, I would recommend "Queen Margot".

quote:

---

Thanks for your input despite my mis-posting. I truly hope that you get your desires met and the name changes. I'll have to get over and vote.

---

Thankyou very much.

quote:

---

In your last post, you say, "If God could have just destroyed Satan and all his followers to prevent them from destroying more of God's creation, why wouldn't God." I like your reasoning, and I think that is exactly the question. Why doesn't God? I'm just wondering if there are other answers than the ones here so far. Think about it, let me know if you come up with anything good. Yes, I have read Boyd's "God at War," and his other works as well. However, I don't think he had the chance to answer this question precisely.

---

Part of the problem is that God is not omnipotent only because God chooses to restrict some of the powers God has had in the past and God cannot go against God's nature. Why not just end Satan's reign over earth like that? Clearly, before the fall, God must have chosen to Give Satan and other fallen angels some autonomy, which is still currently not open to being instantly taken back.

quote:

---

I don't think I was clear enough in my "problem of good" question, which is probably because it belongs in a different post ;) Let me try to rephrase it:

The problem of good is-
1)God punishes sin
2)All humans sin
However...
3)Humans, even those who reject Christ, receive good things from God (e.g. life, happiness, vocation, subjectivity [company of other people, or fraternity], rain, sunshine, etc.).

Is this a problem? Why do good things happen? It seems that though God is wholly Benevolent, He can only be benevolent to other "good" things. I am excited for your thoughts.

---

I'm not sure OVT would affirm no. 1. All sin is separation from God and will make us fall from what he had in mind for us. I don't think God has to punish us, therefore, directly for our sin. We end up punishing ourselves and others when we sin.

This would be analogous to C.S.Lewis' argument that the gates of Hell are locked from within. Going to hell need not be conceived as eternal punishment from God for our sins and lack of confession. Similarly, when we suffer here on earth, it would be mistaken to claim that this is punishment from God for sins we once committed. To much of when we suffer, there is no clear reason for why it happens to us. What's the point of punishing someone for a past sin, when it is so unclear what is being punishd when the punishment/suffering takes place.

If you want my opinion, I would rephrase your question. Yes the Spiritual Warfare Theodicy explains the prevalence of suffering in the world. But it doesn't contribute to explain why there is order and joy/absence of suffering in much of our lives. I don't think I suffer near as much as many people in this world do.

dlw

Prayer from Kenya

From the Cowardice that dare not face new truth,
From the Laziness that is contented with half-truth,
From the Arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
Lord Deliver Me.

quote:

---

DLW: is the OV some kind of dualistic belief? 'If God could kill Satan, he would."
This statement means that Satan is JUST AS powerful as God - in effect- it's the yin and yang of the universe. Can't have one without the other...So Satan then is so powerful - he may actually take over one day, and maybe we should swear allegiance to him??? (for all you literalists out there, i am being tongue in cheek.)

---

quote:

---

I think the OV really carries a Duelistic view of God whether they want to admit it or not. I'm not trying to be a pain, but that's really what i got when reading "God at War." to me, it seems that you people are putting Satan on, or darn near close on the same playing feild as God within power limitations.

---

The OV Spiritual Warfare Theodicy tends to be somewhat manicheistic. I.e., yes at a fundamental level there is conflict between God and Satan and Satan's followers and for that conflict to be real they must have some power/say-so over this world and within the OVT that can only be because God self-imposed some restrictions giving them that say-so/power.

As for the Bible, there are passages describing the Genesis of the conflict between God and Satan. I'm not going to go into them, because detailed analysis of th Old Testament is not my comparative advantage.

quote:

---

God did defeat Satan on the cross. DLW: "Satan's kick may very likely be due to the fallenness of the Church that was supposed to beat down the gates of Hades." So are you saying that God failed to create a church that could overcome Hades? I thought Jesus went and "set the captives free" and i don't believe that the gates of hell prevailed against Him.

---

God did not fail to creat a church that could overcome the gates of hades, that Church abused its freedoms/responsibility to God.

The Gates of Hades are distinct from Hell. I.e., Hitler is in a coma, but the third reich is still functioning and the Allies have been spending too much time fraternizing with the cheese-eating surrender monkeys !

quote:

---

the great thing is, is i don't think the church has to worry about defeating the gates of hell, because we are fallen, so Christ did it Himself! Maybe i'm just rambling on, i don't know if i'm making any sense, but i'll approach this when i have more time.
until than,
grace and peace be yours through Christ,
Borg

---

We know God has ordained the Church to beat down the gates since Christ said so himself. If Christianity has failed, and it has, it is our own fault...

dlw

Prayer from Kenya

From the Cowardice that dare not face new truth,
From the Laziness that is contented with half-truth,
From the Arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
Lord Deliver Me.

quote:

---

To all of you who regularly post here at CVM, I have enjoyed reading your posts, and am thankful for your debate here. However, I am quite concerned, or maybe very puzzled, about a few things that have been said recently.

DLW, you say:
"God must have chosen to Give Satan and other fallen angels some autonomy, which is still currently not open to being instantly taken back."

I think there are probably some impressionable minds here, so it is of utmost importance that we are responsible with our words. We should want to do that at least for the sake of Christ. So I get very nervous when you say that other CREATED things have autonomy. DLW, can you please define what you mean here by autonomy and in what sense you think Satan, fallen angels, or any created thing can have autonomy. If you need to, can you talk about how autonomy can be granted. Does autonomy function as a gift to be given, presumably like grace?

---

quote:

---

Huguenot, I hope you will keep posting. Your comments were very well spoken. I have read some criticsms of the OV and also am quite concerned about the authority given to Satan.

---

quote:

---

borg: I was wondering where in the Bible it says that God entered into an original covenant with Satan? …doesn't the idea of God not destroying Satan because of the freewill really go against the character solidification idea that OVTs carry? if anyone is "so set in his character" it's Satan. Has God turned His back completly on Satan, or do you think He's still trying to change Him? Wouldn't an open theist say that once we have been solidified within our characters than we lose our freewill to an extent? ... Did God make a mistake giving Satan the use of "freewill" as you would say. don't you think that giving Satan such power really made the world a whole lot worse? …p.s. i was wondering on your thought, could Adam and Eve have ever sinned if Satan hadn't fallen first and hadn't been there to tempt them?

---

borg-

These are good questions, borg. I just want to say first that when we discuss stuff like this (pre-creation arrangements God might have made, God’s purpose for angels, the nature of angelic free will, etc.) we’re getting into speculative stuff and ought to exercise MORE tolerance than we would were we discussing the deity of Christ or whether we ought to love each other as believers in one Body.

Secondly, I think we have to start with what IS clear (or at least what we believe is clear) about the world NOW. Then we can speculate if we want to about what must have been the case THEN which permitted the world to get this bad.

I don’t think the Bible anywhere explicitly says God made a pre-creational covenant with Lucifer (before he fell) giving him administration of the earth. But I think something like this makes sense of the world we live in now. And it seems to make more sense than does the theory that God created Satan to be evil and predetermined all that Satan has brought to the world.

The world is fallen. Satan is kicking humanity’s butt. The two opening options are: God did this or Satan did this. I go with the latter. But to go with the latter one must speculate (since the Bible doesn’t explicitly tell us) what might have been the conditions, purpose, and sphere of influence given to Lucifer before his fall. He’s called a/the “prince of the power of the air.” We have to reason from certain beliefs about the world as it now is: a) God and Satan oppose each other, b) the battlefield they oppose each other on is creation, more specifically, our earth, and c) we’re caught up in the battle. Making sense of THIS (which we do know) is the only reason I’d be interested in speculating about what might have been true about Lucifer before he fell, etc., etc. Otherwise I could care less.

It does seem to me to be a requirement of libertarian free will that God, if he gives such freedom, not immediately remove it the first time we exercise it in opposing him by destroying us. If it was God’s intention to give us the sort of freedom that allows us to choose him and not choose him, then it would seem that God also intends to live with the consequences of our choices. So, divinely designed and given libertarian free will would imply God’s agreement (and that’s all I mean by “covenant”) not to remove such freedom when it decides to go in ways God does not intend.

But this “respect” for the freedom God gives us will run out. Free will is finite. We’re NOT free to do what we want without consequence forever and ever. We’re NOT free to choose to be free of God forever. Our free will is finite, limited, and derived from him. It’s not absolute metaphysical autonomy from God. We’re not “self-existent.” God didn’t give us THAT. We’re given a measure of free will and this short live-span we have is the playing field. The clock is ticking and we’re spending our free will just as if it was money in a bank. As we spend it, we BECOME the sort of persons we’ll be forever.

I don’t think there is any hope for Satan. I think whatever was the nature of his freewill (and it must have been libertarian I think), Satan is now forever fixed in evil. Lucy is history! Yes, borg, I think Satan’s power has made the world a much “worse” place. But this is not a problem for me, since I place the blame entirely with Satan who could have done other than evil with his free will. The question is more for you I should think. You’re the one who denies Lucifer had libertarian will and thus that he faced real alternatives. You believe God created him and determined him to do exactly what he has done. So, what do you think about what God has determined should be done through Satan? Can you even use the word “worse” to describe what Satan has done to the world given your belief that he’s done exactly what God decreed him to do? In fact, how can an exhaustively and unconditionally determined world be “worse”? Worse than what? If God’s will is the cause of all things, then there IS no worse than or better than. There is just and precisely what God wills.

Could Adam and Eve have sinned had Satan not fallen and so not been around to tempt them? I suppose so. If they had libertarian free will, and if freely chosen love is even PART of the reason why God created us, then I think we have to admit they’re sinning was possible even apart from Satan. But I’m all ears if you think otherwise. Remember, we’ve off into speculation.

quote:

---

RD: Secondly, nowhere did God make a covenant to Satan! That is blasphemous- is it not? "If God gives this sort for freedom, then he can't really wipe you out when you decide to misuse it." This statement is exactly what I’ve been saying in many other posts - how is the notion of eternal punishment and/separation from God compatible with God wanting us to exercise freedom. If God respects freedom so much, then he should respect our choices, as you seem to say. So how could we possibly be condemned EVER by exercising a choice God disagrees with then? And why does the Bible teach that one day Satan WILL be defeated and punished? If Satan's only exercising his freedom, why should he be wiped out by misusing it, as you say?

---

Gina, Gina, Gina. OK, first, refer to what I said to borg above about God granting specific responsibilities to Lucifer before he fell. Believing this is true is not “blasphemous.” Honestly, where do you get some of your thoughts? There’s no “connect” or “logic” in your thinking, which makes it really hard to know what to say to help you out.

God does not respect libertarian free will so much that he will never judge us for our use of it. It’s got nothing to do with being condemned for our sinful choices. There IS a hell. I personally think sinners will suffer there forever. And I don’t think God’s not “respecting” our freedom if he sends us there for a lifetime of using it against him.

Libertarian free will is not freedom to act with impunity, as you seem to think. It’s rather freedom to act with responsibility. You should get this. Aren’t you studying law or something? Libertarian free will is finite (it doesn’t last forever), limited (it isn’t freedom to decide another person’s fate or choices, nor is it freedom to fly to the moon), and self-defining (that’s my choice of words; what it means is that freedom over time defines my character; I cement myself in behind a lifetime of choice). But being finite and limited doesn’t mean it not REAL!

quote:

---

borg: I think the OV really carries a Duelistic view of God whether they want to admit it or not. I'm not trying to be a pain, but that's really what i got when reading "God at War." to me, it seems that you people are putting Satan on, or darn near close on the same playing feild as God within power limitations. you use phrases like, "If God could destroy Satan" "God keeps Satan alive because the original covenant God entered into with Lucifer", "God must have chosen to Give Satan and other fallen angels some autonomy." I guess i really lack to see where in the Bible things like this are spelled out, and if you could direct me in the path of the Word, than please do. Where did God ever give Satan and his angels freewill?

---

There is an undeniable dualism in Scripture. Good and evil DO exist, they ARE real, and they ARE opposites. John’s gospel presents a certain dualistic (and true) view of life: good/evil, life/death, light/darkness, etc. This much is biblical.

It’s only unbiblical (in my opinion) if you claim “metaphysical dualism,” that is, that Satan (evil, darkness) and God are both equally, eternally, and independently self-existent. Then ya got problems. But the open view doesn’t suggest this. What the OV suggests is that the sort of opposition Satan offers to God, including the fact that God hasn’t already destroyed him, are due to God’s own free and sovereign decision to create Satan will the freedom to choose to oppose him or serve him (Satan chose to oppose God) and that God’s own freely and sovereignly designed purposes for the world include a real eschatology, that is, they include some game-time (as it were) before the party at the end. Satan is not independently self-existent. God even sustains his life. This much we know NOW. OK, so what might have been true about God’s creation of Lucifer (the purposes for which he was created, his freedom, and other divinely endowed responsibilities) if it’s true NOW that a) God continues to sustain Satan’s existence, b) God and Satan oppose each other (and not just God predetermines Satan’s every specific opposing move), and c) God puts up with Satan’s continued war against God and everything else that’s God’s?

quote:

---

borg: i guess my to the point question is that don't we all in some manner or another form God in our likeness, our needs, our deisres, whether we want to admit it or not? and if so, than how do we break away from this if we can't even read the Bible without having a tained image of God? any help you could offer would be great.

---

Oooo, borg. You’re THINKING outside the box! Way cool dude. Let me suggest TWO things:

1) While it may be true that the fundamental defining beliefs of Christianity are non-negotiable (like Modes says, they’re “first-order discourse” stuff) and true, it’s not the case that OUR systematic expressions of these truths are non-negotiable and inerrant. We can always be wrong. This is tricky, but we can’t avoid facing it. You’re question shows that you’re trying to face it. We want to say we have non-negotiable beliefs and we also want to say that we could be wrong in our systematic expressions and statement of faith.

Scripture is inspired and authoritative, right? OK. But it’s got to be read and interpreted. What about our readings and interpretations? Are they inspired too? And our statements of faith? Are they inspired and authoritative like the Bible? No. They can’t be. My point is. We go to the Bible as an inspired and authoritative source. OK. But each generation has to receive, examine, and reaffirm traditional beliefs. This leads me to my second point…

2) We NEED each other. The WHOLE church has the responsibility of taking up tradition and turning it right and left, over and over in its hands with an eye on SCRIPTURE in order to renew the faith of former generations for itself. Some things might get tossed out. Some things might get tweaked and reworded. Some things will pass on untouched. I do tend to read the Bible out of my own experience. You do too. So what do we do? We share our experience and ideas. So I’m not left to MY experience alone. I have your experience to think about, and RD’s, and Piper’s, and Pinnock’s, and Boyd’s, and, and and. The more we share and cross-pollinate, the less likely we are to get off into error.

Sound strange coming from an open theist?

quote:

---

Christian: Angels and demons chose their destinies long ago. God gave them Plan A and Plan B. Plan A: submit to my authority. Plan B: don't submit and be cast out of heaven forever.

---

You are sooooo right! God gave angels two options. Hmmm. One question: Did God believe these were options, or did God only believe the angels thought these were options? In other words, when God gave the options, did God believe “The angels might go with option A or they might go with option B” was true or false? What did GOD believe the truth-value of this proposition was?

Tom

quote:

---

Tom - I have to ask what you do for a living. You say about me: "There’s no “connect” or “logic” in your thinking, which makes it really hard to know what to say to help you out." Do you realize this is an ad hominem attack...

---

Gina-

OK, I didn't say you have no logic to your thoughts without qualification. I was referring to only one specific comment of yours (right there in your quote above my response), namely, that the notion that God might have an agreement or covenant of sorts regarding Lucifer's job description has ANYTHING at all to do with the notion of eternal punishment. I was discussing God's purpose in creating Lucifer and whether and what it would mean if that purpose had included Lucifer's possessing libertarian free will, and YOU BRING UP ETERNAL PUNISHMENT? There is no connect here Gina. None whatsoever. And I honestly don't know what logic led you to think there was. Help me see the connection: God gives us libertarian free will AND doesn't get to toss us into hell for a lifetime of misusing it? How's that follow?

I'm not attacking you ad hominem. I remembered you mentioned something about being a lawyer and it occured to me that lawyers usually have very well-informed and developed views of human freedom and responsibility. I'm surprised that the notion of libertarian freedom has you so stumped. I'm sorry for offending you. Didn't mean to.

Smile Gina.

Tom


Edited by - TGB on 05/20/2003 12:02:07 AM