Christian Theological/Philosophical Book Club discussion
The Forum - Debate Religion
>
Does the Devil understand Jesus?
Rod - blind with rage, yes; clueless, no. If Armageddon is to be believed, Satan will assemble an impressive number of lost souls against the Lord. That he loses and loses lopsidedly is a given, but his entire army of followers is lost to the Kingdom of God forever. A pity really, but life is about choices - even the smallest and seemingly inconsequential can imperil the perp eternally. Satan gets a measure of revenge for his falling out just by exploiting our lusts.
He is clueless about God's truth and person. Which leads me to think he's very similar to your average overly intelligent atheist non-Christian. Brilliant but missing the obvious.
I've wondered that. How does he think he can win against The Almighty Creator? He's got to be out of the loop somewhere. I mean he knows humans inside and out. We've been falling for his same old tricks since the beginning of human existence. But, they don't call him the father of deceit for nothing! Blind with rage - totally! He must know how much it hurts God to lose a soul. He's mean.
The majority of Christians think Satan WILL come out ahead in the end. That God will fail on most accounts, and the majority of souls will wind up in a lost eternity. If this is true, and the power of the cross is less than the power of Satan, then we may be worshiping the wrong being.
Thanks Kris.Lee I don't think most Christians think Satan will necessarily come out ahead. (WE assume all aborted babies, children will be heavenbound.) That is a whole lot of people.
I also think Satan only gets credit for a portion of the deceived. Most people deceive themselves by rejecting what's right in front of them.
Of course Jesus had to say:
Matthew 7:14
14 "For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few."
God had this planned from the beginning.
I can't figure out what you're suggesting, Rod. Are you saying God will save more souls than he loses, and Jesus was wrong in Matthew 7:14? Or are you saying God planned from the beginning to lose the battle? I'm thinking of verses like Ephesians 1:10
Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
Was Paul wrong, and this wasn't God's will after all?
Realistically God is not losing any souls. He's getting exactly what he desired. The final percentage is really none of our business.Ephesians 1:4-
4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will
Paul and God are in perfect agreement. All things in Christ shall be gathered. All things NOT in Christ shall not be gathered.
God's will is going perfectly according to plan. For all eternity we shall understand how Good & Evil work, and the love we have for Jesus.
Rod is right. Paul and God are in perfect agreement.One of the questions in this discussion seems to be: Why would God create the world when He knew most people would be lost?
Here's my take:
Because if there is even ONE person left in the world who is DECLARED righteous [innocent], He will GIVE that person what he or she has asked for: eternal life with God.
We're all sinners -- some have been/will be declared righteous or innocent, but most will not be declared innocent and therefore are/will be lost.
Is God desirous that most people will be lost?
Biblically speaking, if we agree that those who are NOT in Christ are lost and counted among the wicked [guilty], it is true that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked (Ezekiel 33:11):
“Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they TURN from their ways and LIVE’ ” (emphasis mine).
TURN and LIVE. That’s a person’s free choice.
God doesn’t “cast” or “send” anyone to hell. It’s a choice a person makes for oneself when one rejects the gospel message.
If most people choose to enter hell, it is hardly an argument to say that God was defeated.
God is always in control. He gives a person the choice, but notice that He gave His life so that person wouldn't make a really BAD choice. The good news is so good, because the bad news is so bad.
In the end, He knows who has eternal life with Him and who doesn't, and He's known this from the beginning.
Debbie wrote: "Rod is right. Paul and God are in perfect agreement.One of the questions in this discussion seems to be: Why would God create the world when He knew most people would be lost?
Here's my take:..."
Debbie,
I don't want to be "that guy," but this post is so spurious, I truly have to comment on a few errors you wrote out.
First, God not taking pleasure in the death of the wicked must be understood in context--you proof texted Ezekiel 33:11--as this passage was specifically towards the covenant people of Israel who heard the exhortation of repentance by the watchman of the wall appointed by the LORD. That is not to say that a trans-cultural, timeless, biblically supported principle can't be drawn out of this passage; however, you have to be careful when you don't apply proper biblical hermeneutic to single verses, especially when they are in the Old Testament.
Just as it pleased the LORD to make you prosper and increase in number, so it will please him to ruin and destroy you. You will be uprooted from the land you are entering to possess. --Deuteronomy 28:63
Certainly God doesn't delight in an unjust way the death of the wicked, that is to say, dispositionally, as per Ezek 18:32, 33:11; however, God certainly delights in the death (judgment) of the wicked preceptively, (referring to God's different wills; viz., Decretive (secret, declarative, sovereign), Dispositional, and Prescriptive (perceptive, moral).
Secondly, you're three word citation form Ezekiel of "Turn and live" is hardly a proof text to drawn out the doctrine of "free-will" (at least how you're most likely understanding it to mean) when the entirety of the NT scriptures are against it. Certainly, God calls and commands us all to repent. Literally, to turn and live! This, however, has nothing to do with our ability to actually do so on our own volition (libertarian-free will). In fact, the Scriptures speak that we actually can not turn and live without the resurrection of from God Almighty.
Scriptures say we are dead in our sin (Eph 2:1, Col 2:13-15), unable to come to God (Rom 3:10-19), haters of God (Rom 5:10, Col 1:21), unable to please God (Rom 8:8), completely unable to ever understand the gospel message (1 Cor 1:18), unable to ever accept the gospel (1 Cor 2:14).
So while it is not in the sense you're using it, of course we have free-will. Man, in his free-will, will never choose God, but will 100% of the time always choose sin, death, and hell.
It is only by God's efficacious grace, whereby he predestined those to righteousness solely in His sovereign good pleasure, that we all are not destined to eternal damnation (Rom 9-11, Eph 1-2).
You stated that "God doesn't cast or send anyone to hell"
I'm afraid the Scriptures testify against that statement.
"Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”
What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?”(i.e. but, but, but, if we don't have "free-will" we won't be responsible for our actions!) But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory—even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? As he says in Hosea:
“I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people;
and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,"
and,
“In the very place where it was said to them,
‘You are not my people,’
there they will be called ‘children of the living God.’”
Isaiah cries out concerning Israel:
“Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea,
only the remnant will be saved.
For the Lord will carry out
his sentence on earth with speed and finality."
It is just as Isaiah said previously:
“Unless the Lord Almighty
had left us descendants,
we would have become like Sodom,
we would have been like Gomorrah.”
--Romans 9:10-29
Amen.
Good job, Debby and Brent - if you combined your two posts you have a pretty good framing of "salvation". Trotting out OT admonitions as applicable to a post-Messiah world should not be done recklessly. When Hebrews were God's only concern, He took sides, played favorites, fixed wars, designated superheros, doomed all peoples, set Satan free, and generally micromanaged the entire scenario. Whether He merely tired of the effort or just saw Man was rather a hopeless case for supervision isn't clear, but the sending of Jesus was God's bail out plan. Now the responsibility has been transferred to ALL mankind to determine their own fate. Jesus still calls, but gently, and most ignore the direct wooing. Brent is correct, Man left to his own devices is 100% dead in Sin. That is why, we, as Christians, have the primary duty to spread, no, not sappy love or compassion as some here advocate, but the Good News to the fullest extent we can. We are Jesus' surrogates charged with a specific duty. Simply "feeling someone's pain" is liberal cop out for shirking the true Christian calling. There also needs to be some urgency about this. Those dead in sin don't get the calling forever as Debby seems to think. If someone is hellbent for too long, then so be it, the hardening of the heart takes place and his most fervent desires are granted. I suppose, for practical purposes, this manifests itself in a "convert them while they're young, because an old fool is an old fool and not worth much effort" mindset, but one's energies and resources aren't infinite and need be shepherded.
David - actually, you're right where you should be. When young, all is possible. As you age, you jettison what doesn't work until despair sets in that "nothing works." From that low point, the wise rebuild around a workable credo. That you have acknowledged our Savior will eventually reign supreme, but dark times lay ahead when you will severely question, even abandon Him.
Brent wrote: "I don't want to be "that guy..."Brent, first you are not “that guy.” If you are in Christ, you are my brother in Christ, and I want to treat you with gentleness and respect, regardless of your position on divine election.
You are also a fellow human being and I want to treat you with gentleness and respect.
Secondly, you wrote: “God not taking pleasure in the death of the wicked must be understood in context--you proof texted Ezekiel 33:11--as this passage was specifically towards the covenant people of Israel who heard the exhortation of repentance by the watchman of the wall appointed by the LORD.”
Brent, the context of the passage may be specifically toward the covenant people of Israel, but not the meaning behind the phrase “death of the wicked.” The guilty are guilty, whether or not they reside in the OT or the New Testament.
If you like, we can flip this to Ezekiel 18:32 (emphasis mine):
“For I take no pleasure in the death of ANYONE, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and Live!”
NIV 1984
Now to the rest of what you said, you made some excellent points and I will ponder those. Other points I may take issue with. Or I might not.
I will tell you I am in favor of a balanced view of divine election, but do I want to argue that? I am more concerned with pointing, if possible, as many people to Christ as I can.
I respect Robert a great deal: "Gray hair is a crown of glory; it is gained in a righteous life." Prov 16:31
Great long post Brent.I'm over 40 and in full agreement with you.
All we can do is trust what the Bible says. God is incharge for his Glory.
I deleted my post because I thought it was a bit too mean-spirited and personal. Sorry.
Ha! Ha! David what you think is mean-spirited is what I generally throw out as a compliment.
Brent - thanks for the accolade. I've had my "dark days" when the Lord's vision for me didn't resonate and I was completely within the realm of the flesh. I'd love to say all temptation is past, but that would just be asking to be sucker punched by Satan.
And I thought I was the funny one. I might actually enjoy this place again thanks to you Robert.
Rod - we're both funny; whether it is Ha!HA! or peculiar depends on circumstances!
Lots of interesting posts here. I sure do appreciate any follower of Christ who is actively working out their faith with fear and trembling (Phil. 2:12). I spent some time addressing this matter in my book, The Conditioned Mind. On page 187 I wrote: ‘God’s original intent for Lucifer was for him to serve within His kingdom in wonderful and mighty ways. But from Isaiah’s passage, [Isaiah 14:12-15] it is clear that this archangel had other plans. Ultimately, he sought to place himself above our heavenly Father—to be “above the tops of the clouds.” Once this seed of pride took root, a sinister evil grew in Lucifer’s heart. In the end, he sought to make himself “like the Most High.” Once he was cast out of heaven, his pride turned to hatred. Lucifer had fallen from his high place as the morning star to that of Satan—adversary of God.’ So, to answer the original question: Does the devil understand Jesus? I would say, yes, but as the ultimate narcissist, I believe Satan actually sees himself as superior to Christ. Grandiose? You bet! Formidable? Yes, the devil should never to be underestimated. But we find victory through Christ Jesus (Romans 8:33-39). Peace, brothers and sisters! The Conditioned Mind
Michael - good thoughts on Lucifer, and, as a fellow author, good luck with your book!
Michael, you interpret the Lucifer of Isaiah 14 to be Satan?
@ Lee. The typology here is found in the commonality between the Babylonian empire, which in the Scripture is representative of tyrannical and self-idolizing power, and the characteristics of a prideful Lucifer. With respect to the “morning star,” the Hebrew term used here is heylel (hay-lale’), which is derived from halal (haw-lal’), a primitive root that means “to be clear.” Prior to his fall from heaven, Lucifer reflected the glory of God as an archangel. His praises to the Lord were clear and beautiful, perhaps among the purest and most beautiful of sounds. However, over time, Lucifer began to take on a nature of pride, which is also what halal came to be associated with— the making of a show, to boast, and thus to be clamorously foolish.
I have a question about typology in general, and how believers perceive that it comes about. Is it safe to say that Isaiah did not know he was describing Satan as he penned these "Lucifer" words about the Babylonian king? But because he was inspired in his writings, the message contained a hidden meaning which came to light much later? (pun intended).
Lee, while I cannot speak for how other believers come to understand biblical typology, for me it is through the application of hermeneutical theory, i.e., study of the canon, textual criticism, historical criticism, exegesis, as well as biblical and systematic theology. How about you, brother, by what means do you interpret Scripture? :-)As for Isaiah, it is rather clear from his writings the God worked through the prophet in systematic fashion; addressing prophecies of condemnation (chs. 1-35), historical parenthesis (chs. 36-39), along with prophecies of comfort (chs. 40-66). It is also understood that God helps us to better understand matters through various means of teachings. One such means is through a specific type of parable involving similes; which is, in part, what Isaiah was utilizing in chapters 13-23. Another example of this technique of similes is found in Matthew 13; wherein, Jesus is helping us to better understand what Heaven is like; a topic that can be rather nebulous. Given all of the sixty-six chapters of Isaiah, it is likely that the prophet did have revelation that he was describing Lucifer/Satan; yet, was doing so in a way that those of his day would be more apt to take the similarity of the surrounding nations and connect them with a deeper understanding that there is an evil adversary orchestrating against God (or YHWH as the Hebrews understood it). Key in all of this is the revelation of God's love, grace, and mercy found in the prophecies of comfort, and, ultimately, His fulfillment of those prophecies.
Peace out, brother!
Michael, I "interpret" scripture mostly through historical-critical analysis. I don't subscribe to any level of inerrancy, but rather am fascinated by discovering what the authors meant and believed and what their agenda was. From that perspective, I suppose a solid case could be made that Isaiah was not-so-subtly calling the king the devil ... if it can be shown that anyone in his day believed that Satan was an evil being the way we do today.
I am not so much a believer as I am a Jesus freak. Peace out!
OK, I'm just going to flat out say it, Lucifer is not Satan. I'm sorry, but it seems painfully clear to me that Isaiah is calling the king of Babylon Lucifer, or the morning star, or dawn star. The connection of Lucifer to Satan is tenuous at best. The Hebrew bible, OT, almost never mentions satan and when it does satan appears to be an angel working under the direction of god. I'm sorry, but I just don't see how satan is also lucifer. The texts clearly don't support that conclusion. At least to my satisfaction. Feel free to disagree, I know Rob and Robert will.
Guillermo, I too struggled with the concept of typology in the Bible. Yet, through the course of my graduate studies in Theology, I came to understand the more esoteric concepts involved with Old Testament foreshadowing, especially where the "crimson thread" is concerned. For example, the apostle Paul declares Adam to be a type (i.e., a tupos, Greek) of Christ (see Romans 5:14). Paul also writes about the typology of the Mosaic Law, using the word shadow (i.e., skia, Greek) in Colossians 2:17). The author of Hebrews touches upon typology in 8:5 and 9:9; wherein, the Greek terms hupodeigma and parabole are used respectively. In 9:9, the author relates the OT Tabernacle to being a figure of the author's present time. The apostle Peter touches upon typology as well in 1 Peter 3:21, i.e., baptism in water is symbolic of death of old self, and rebirth of new self in Christ. Now, having said all of this, I fully concur that any student of God's Word must be careful not to fall into extremism on either the literal or figurative side of interpretation. Bottom line, the Bible tells the account of God's love, grace, and mercy. His receptive work through His Son, Jesus Christ, is to be a transformative experience for the student; wherein, we become more like Him, and less like ourselves. I admit, while I aspire to such heights, I fall way short; thus, I humble myself further, and praise Him even more for His love, grace, and mercy. :-)
Michael, I get people will use typology to understand certain texts of the bible, I'm just not convinced the original authors had that meaning in mind when they wrote them. Some might find a type of Christ in Adam or a type of Satan in the snake, but I don't think the original writers saw it that way. Of course that's just my opinion, and I have no problem with people finding deeper meanings if it helps them in their lives, I'm just not convinced it was part of the original meaning. I also want to say that sometimes using typology to understand the texts can actually make them more obscure. The best example of this is in second Isaiah or chapters 40-55. If you read the texts with the understanding it's talking about the nation of Judah's return from Babylonian captivity, the texts make perfect sense to me. When you try to say the suffering servant mentioned four times is a type of Jesus, well, the texts become more convoluted. Just my take on it, but I appreciate you not calling me an idiot straight up because I don't exactly agree with you. :)
Good stuff Michael.I've been discussing baptism with people. I forgot about 1 Peter 3:21 clearing it up.
"Baptism, which corresponds to this (Noah's Ark), now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ..."
Isaiah 43:11I, I am the lord, and besides me there is no savior.
Titus 1:4
...Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.
I've been mostly dealing with Muslims lately who claim the Bible does not in any way make Jesus out to be God. It is fun showing them the 100's of verses that connect Jesus with divinity.
Debbie wrote: "Rod is right. Paul and God are in perfect agreement.One of the questions in this discussion seems to be: Why would God create the world when He knew most people would be lost?
Here's my take:..."
Debbie, Biblically speaking, I think you hit everything on the mark. What a good job you did of explain this. Sometimes I'd like to answer a question but just can't find the words. Your words reflect exactly how I feel. Appreciate it.
If we assume that the plan of God is by definition the best plan, then I cannot see how one could say that the devil understands God, his truth or his plan. If he did, he would know without a doubt that it would be better for him to accept it. He would then be in the strange situation of opposing not only what is best, but what he thinks to be best.I think if there is one thing the devil does NOT understand, it is God.
Thank you Jake. That was my point exactly. Satan is delusional and missing what is right in front of him. He couldn't function properly if he wasn't.
Similar to a brilliant atheistic scientist who tells a tale so mind-boggling fascinating that everyone just assumes it is truth.
For Satan not to comprehend Jesus is hilarious. He offered Jesus (God of the universe) a few man-made dirt cities. I bet everyone in heaven was laughing hysterically.
Of course God's plan is the best plan, but it is not the plan that humans, by and large, are going to take.
While I have this copied: I'll post it again...Matthew 7
13“Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.
Almost daily I hear Christians preach humanism and that God is going to save everyone. But the Bible never says that.
Satan gets the last laugh on this one. So sad.
Rod - you and I have both entered by the narrow gate, but try dragging someone in with you. They will rebel with every ounce of fiber in their being even against plausible explanations of why they are suffering so on earth and a better way is attainable. The gate is wide and easy that leads to destruction and Satan gives every willing victim a Hot Rod Lincoln to cruise the boulevard with to hook up with other lost souls.
I think that is our hope with apologetics: To give people an opportunity to get a glimpse past their rebellion with logic, reason, and general information...But that Hot Rod Lincoln is just too much fun for most people. Well said Robert. Satan must hate God's logic.
what kind of rebellion? what are nonbelievers rebelling against?
Lee what does the Bible say people rebel against? Hint: All of God's commands and desires and truth...and anything that gives him glory. (I rebel too - but I try not to practice it and train for the rebellion Olympics.)
But atheists don't believe in God. How do you rebel against someone who doesn't exist?
Lee just because someone doesn't believe in something doesn't make it true. Atheist reject Gods existence as a form of rebellion. But people who call themselves atheist are not actually atheist, "they just suppress the truth in unrighteousness" (Romans 2) (sorry I had to use scripture :)One of my favourite quotes from R C Sproul - "The issue of faith is not so much whether we believe in God, but whether we believe the God we believe in."
Everybody rebels against God - it's just a matter of degree. To wit: I sin; I turn to my Savior; I still sin. Rebellion is anticipated and expected as foretold in Scripture.
Great answers guys. You saved me some typing.
If atheists secretly believe in God, they need no apologist. If they don't believe in God, they cannot be consciously rebelling against God.Perhaps you mean atheists rebel against Christian values?I can see that, if Christian values are prevalent.
But values are not all they complain about Lee. Most atheists I chat with are angry at the very Nature of God. They disprove of his character and claims in the Bible.
It is interesting when I meet people who are true atheists. They just live...then die. They don't spend their days fighting a God who they don't think exists (like all the NEW atheists I meet.)
With you partially, Rod. I abhor the "new atheists" approach. If that sounds like a strong word, so be it. I find no redeeming value in people who live to tear down, and I see a lot of that.Of course, I also think we should lift ourselves above the morals displayed in portions of the Bible. You all know how strongly I speak out against bigotry. Does that mean I get angry at God? Of course not. It means I get angry at the bigots who think God hates gays.
Nobody gets angry at God except those who believe he has somehow wronged them.
Interesting comment Lee:"Nobody gets angry at God except those who believe he has somehow wronged them."
And yet every human claims fairness in certain areas, equality for themselves, some form of love...(wait for it)... and JUSTICE.
Everybody demands justice - they just don't like God's Biblical justice. :cp
I think it is the ONLY justice that we can even claim. Evolution and science offer NO justice. Nature has no justice. Atheism really has no core justice.
A love that doesn't protect - is not a very good love.
Lee I'm waiting for the day you become honest and throw out the WHOLE Bible. Or just become a humanistic buddhist.
Why would I want to throw out ANY of the Bible? With the possible exception of the book of Revelation - not because of what it says, but because its misinterpretation has created a century of Antichrist hunters intent on demonizing anyone or anything that might make this world better.
Not a chance. I think Satan is basically clueless and blind with rage.
Satan thought he could tempt the God of the Universe with a few pathetic little mankind cities? Now that's funny. God makes UNIVERSES and GALAXIES... imagine how a little dirt city would look to Jesus?