What does Satan represent?

Post Reply New Topic

And what really is "arrogance" but a pejorative describing defiance of presumed absolute authority? All strikes for freedom against oppression can be so labeled. The whole religious myth is an invented piece of nonsense to prevent defiance against authority.

Look why mankind was doomed (according to the Christian interpretation of Scripture). Because the man and the woman wanted to know what was right, what was wrong. What was good, what was evil. God got pissed because the man and the woman wanted to exercise the very intelligence that God endowed them with. Apparently God just wanted the man and woman to take care of His Garden. like Poncho, Pepe, Jose and Domingo do for the grounds around homes in Beverley Hills.

ruveyn

Gardening is very relaxing.

At least until the bugs get to your tomatoes.

There were no tomatoes in Biblical Israel. If Adam were made to relax God never would have made Eve.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji-cT58rgNc[/youtube]

Much of Lucifer's/Satan's arrogance in Paradise Lost had to do with a simple defiance of authority (insolence, insubordination, rebellion); John Milton was indeed probably reacting in part to the political chaos the English Civil Wars wrought. Arrogance, though, is not the same as rebelliousness; one can be arrogant without ever having defied authority. Moreover, can't authority be arrogant? I would say arrogance has more to do with an individual valuing his or her own needs, wants, and opinions far above others'. An arrogant person acts because they believe they solely possess the right solely for being themselves.

It's probably a bit stronger than mere self confidence. It's a matter of refusing to consider any other opinion than one's own.

arrogant: having or revealing an exaggerated sense of one's own importance or abilities

When I've used the word "arrogant" or "arrogance" in relation to the fallen nature of mankind, I'm referring to the psychological pattern in which man assumes that his will is more important or more noble than God's will.

The argument, for example, regarding "If God exists, then why does He allow ___?" The whole point is that since God is in control and is ultimately responsible for what we see as good or evil, it is always God's wisdom that prevails. Because of the prevalence of human suffering, it's easy to say that God's way makes no sense. Well, there you go--the human mind cannot comprehend God's wisdom.

And because we do not comprehend God's wisdom, the sense that we have of our own importance and ability leads us to mistakenly believe that we are somehow higher and nobler than God, which is not something that we can possibly be. Ergo our own sense of importance and ability is exaggerated, which by definition is arrogance.

I think we have been indirectly influenced by Satan's own sin in the way in which we elevate our own motives above all others, and it is a difficult task to overcome our self-seeking desires.

I want to formalize the argument you're making here so that you can see the induction you're making:

That's a tautology. Though, perhaps such tautologies best not be understood in light of the logic therein; we should simply believe. This argument also seems to generalize to a more general kind of fatalism: a disdain for all intellectual curiosity and attempts to understand the nature of things because these can all be brushed aside as "God's wisdom."

Not to be arrogant or anything.

If God exists (and I have maximum doubts about this) whether his intellect is superior or whatever, he or it is entirely alien to what I know or, (most probably) can know and therefore I must have total trust that it's agenda is something I wholly endorse. Considering the long history of human misery and this superior being's ineptitude in alleviating it to any reasonable or acceptable degree I simply do not have that trust.

Last edited by Sand on 01 Sep 2010, 1:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

That's actually not the point I was getting at. Let me put it a different way: Suppose you apply for a job. And let's say that you are hired for that job because your resumé and statements made in the interview reflect the vision of the business owner/CEO/etc. So on the first day on the job, you find yourself working closely with the owner or perhaps a subordinate very close to the owner, a second-in-command of sorts. And that person to whom you answer gives you exact instructions on how to perform your duties consistent with company policy and mission. As soon as you get your instructions, you immediately begin questioning those policies, the mission, and the efficacy of the methods within which you are tasked.

Further: Your disagreement with your superior(s) leads to an argument that cannot be resolved because you are already convinced that your method will work better. And finally, before you are dismissed, your superiors reveal to you that policies/methods must be carried out in the specific ways in which you were instructed because: Legal issues dictated that certain precautions be taken, ditto for safety issues, and/or the success of the company has been built upon/determined by those policies/missions.

Now of course, you aren't a lawyer, nor are you in any kind of position to determine safety procedures, nor are you in a position in which you can set company-wide goals. So you are acting in such a way as to suggest you know law better than lawyers, safety better than (for example) a standards committee, and successful leadership and planning better than a seasoned and experienced business owner. You can't understand the logic of your superior(s) because you aren't in his/her/their position. Certain things that appear to be inefficient or "in the way" are there for a reason that, to you, seems to have no reasonable nor logical basis.

In such a situation, you cannot understand the logic of things which have been in place since before you arrived on the scene because you aren't the person who made/makes policy. Nevertheless, it isn't your place to dispute those things. You may ask why. You may ask questions to help your own understanding. You may, over time, offer suggestions/requests that you feel would actually be better. But you do not have the right to completely take over as though you're the owner, and you have no cause for immediately revising or reversing missions and policies. They are there for the benefit of the whole, not just those in authority.

God is like that. You fail to understand God's reasons because those reasons don't seem to make sense. Yet you are not the person in a position of power and authority, nor are you responsible anyone's actions beyond your own.

Let's take a look at some of those policies: First, God cannot contradict Himself. Second, God cannot violate His own nature--all-knowing, all-powerful, all-present, and so on. Third, God cannot violate human free will. If you're going to tell the boss that your way is better, then you have to propose a plan that meets EACH of those three conditions. You can try all you want, but anything that you say that is NOT consistent with Biblical teaching will violate one of those three conditions in some way.

Now, you pointed out this is a tautology. Well, it IS if and only if you leave in the false assumption, which is in P3. I would say that God prefers a world without suffering, or that God would prefer that suffering would be minimized. You're assuming that God has His own way and that His way is taken out of the hands of humans exercising free will. If that were the case, then free will is violated and the notion of a loving, just, and merciful God is contradicted. Rather than what I said earlier, it seems that THIS condition would lead more towards fatalism and disregard for intellectual curiosity.

And speaking of fatalism: The problem here is another false assumption--that simply because it is impossible to fully comprehend the breadth and scope of God's wisdom that it is foolish to try. What is foolish and arrogant is to try to rise above God, not seeking to understand God. We often find that God's purpose for us is unclear--for many different reasons. Perhaps because we are willful people. Perhaps God's expectations of us seem hopeless and difficult because we haven't spent enough time (yet) trusting God. It is not disdain for intellectual curiosity and attempts to understand the nature of things for a person to inquire of God what His plan is.

Further, human wisdom is limited, like it or not, but the limited value is still value (and GREAT value at that). God gives us knowledge of this world by graciously allowing us to explore it. And because we have access to great power through these attempts to understand, we are capable of performing on a daily basis those things which certainly would have appeared miraculous only millennia ago. It only makes sense that we ask God to continue to increase our knowledge and ability. There is no need to assume that we are brushing aside all the great unknowns left out there as "God's wisdom." This, again, violates God's nature as well as contradicts material reality.

The real conclusion here is that we fail at answering questions such as "Why does God allow suffering?" because we fail to grasp the fact that God is in control and shares in our pain. We can't comprehend why someone would allow such things to happen because we fail to see the "bigger picture" of what it takes to bring a world of suffering to a conclusion. If it angers you, just to use human suffering as an example, that God isn't doing anything, could it be that God has given you that anger because He wants to use YOU to alleviate someone else's misfortune? And if God impresses upon you to do something about it, can you any longer place the blame on God for what YOU fail to do? You can answer the questions if you want, despite the fact they are meant as rhetorical questions. Obviously, I say you cannot place the blame on God because of YOUR actions. Once again, it is OUR arrogance that leads us to ask "if there is a God, why...?" when the real question ought to be "If ___, why don't we...?"

This alien God you propose that is totally incomprehensible and to which you seem totally devoted despite its incomprehensibility is no different than enslaving one's self to some kind of alien interstellar invader. As a humans we must make our own way and ignore this all thumbs screw-up who must be held responsible for the mess over which he has supposed total control.

Last edited by Sand on 01 Sep 2010, 6:22 am, edited 1 time in total.

Based on what should we believe this supposedly god has any wisdom - let alone 'infinite wisdom' - which is meaningless?

AFAIK even the Jewish religion does not have this idea. All we have is some assertions.

Well, IF God were some kind of alien interstellar invader, I might agree with you. But since the nature of God is that of spirit rather than physical form (with the exception of Jesus and the occasional manifestation of angels), the idea is not that hard to grasp.

Assuming for the moment we're talking about the same God, however, "incomprehensible" only makes sense so far as there exists a wide gulf between God's reasons for doing things and man's reasons for doing things. It's easy to grasp if you keep an open mind, but it will never be understood as long as you have the blinders of mistakenly believing that you have a better way.

A question that comes up from time to time (which I never seem to answer, but have recently) is how one may know the mind of God. I think that God wishes to be known, even though the ways in which we may know God have boundaries. If God didn't care, He wouldn't have revealed those things when He wrote the Bible through human writers. I've just finished reading through the OT. One of the interesting features of The Prophets is a constant reminder that the words the prophets wrote are not THEIR words but words given to them by God to pass on to His people and the rest of the world. Because inspired writings establish a pattern of thought and behavior, we can, with some effort, discern how it is an unchanging God relates to us in present-day circumstances. Further, God seeks a personal relationship with the believer. Christians feel that the presence of the Holy Spirit with every believer (rather than just the few "important ones" like in the OT) solidifies that relationship, and by constantly weighing one's own actions with what they are led to do through divine effort, coupled with constant communion with God through prayer, one MAY (is allowed to) find further insight into God's mind and determine what His will really is. This is not easy because the human mind is clouded with it's own desires.

I think of it as a sort of discipline, and it took a series of very difficult, heart-breaking events in my life (though I now look back on myself back then as being a very silly person) to figure it all out as to how to accomplish this in a consistent way. You mentioned "enslavement." Well, I'm not going to lie about it--it IS a kind of enslavement. But I think human freedom (not talking about free will here, but freedom in a larger sense) is, in part, a delusion. In a sense, we are all slaves to one master or another, and I think perhaps one of the few true freedoms we have is which master we choose to serve. The real turning point in my experience as a Christian, the point at which I finally "got it," was after college when I had nowhere else to go but a strong desire and drive to study the more creative aspect of music--composition. I'd not had ANY formal training in that area beyond the requisite theory classes, form and analysis, and orchestration (the last two being the ONLY upper-level theory courses available at my school). I really didn't feel my paltry attempts at writing--a serial piece for synth and piano, an art song for soprano and piano, and a short piece for concert band--were truly worthy of any graduate program, not to mention I had no friends willing to perform or record those compositions in the way they are supposed to be done. I agonized over that. I felt God was telling me to go, but I couldn't see how it was possible. So I simply prayed that if my feeble attempts at composing got me into a music school, it was only God's will that allowed it. Therefore it could ONLY be the right thing to do (by God) if I went.

While there, I came to a point when I took my acceptance to that school for granted. When I expressed such sentiment to an acquaintance, he responded by telling me that there were several applications to the graduate program in composition. Of all those applications, I was only one of three that was actually accepted. They could just as easily rejected my application, and maybe even SHOULD have. I can only credit my move to that school as not something done by MY effort and influence, but rather of a stronger, divine will.

I have, since that moment, completely renounced my free will. I don't want it. My will, MY decisions have never done me any good in life. Complete submission to One who DOES know all there is to know, on the other hand, has been a source of happiness and contentment throughout my life--before that moment and since. If we are to assume, as some of us here do, that there is really no such thing as free will AT ALL, then we have to accept that we are all slaves anyway. My masters are Joy and Peace, and I can't imagine any better masters to serve than those.

Binary: Logic dictates that an all-present, all-knowing, all-powerful God is an infinite God. An all-knowing God has to possess infinite knowledge and infinite wisdom, else He isn't all-knowing. Now, I can't speak for the Jewish religion in contemporary practice, but I like to think I've got a pretty good grasp on the OT by this point. When the temple was in the plans, God (through the writer) raised an objection to the effect of no house could contain Him. This alone indicates that the material world is not big enough for God. From a logical perspective, it isn't unreasonable to think of God as infinite. "Wisdom" has been communicated by God through those He chose to deliver His message to His people and the world, and we find this in the written form of the Bible. Hence we have evidence of God's infinite nature as well as His wise nature.

I appreciate the sincerity of your sentiments but some alien and supposedly non-material intellect could just as easily foist all that belief on an essentially simple minded and basically ignorant group of people who had no idea of the many aspects of the universe we now have and were totally gullible to a highly sophisticated intellect. As far as my understanding of much of Biblical lore may be it is so full of primitive balderdash that I would have to cease rational thinking totally to accept much of it. Since rational thinking has not only kept me alive but has done so for billions of people in one way or another throughout history it seems to me to be far more valuable than most other kinds of thought.
The convincer in your life seems to have been a piece of timely luck at being accepted into a musical education. I have had similar experiences with no prayers or supernatural forces involved. I have also had some very bad things happen without voodoo witches or demons involved.
I am not trying to convince you as I am now well convinced your viewpoint is set in stone. It's merely my point of view.

Sand: Why would you HAVE to cease rational thinking? Many of my conclusions have come through rational examination rather than purely emotional whims. SOME things I've gotten figured out, but that doesn't mean I don't still have a lot of questions. It just means that the one or two things that are MOST important.

I've come to the conclusion that a lot of things I was taught or heard in sermons were incorrect. That doesn't mean the rest of it has to be thrown away. It only means that I should actually READ the text upon which the theology of my faith is based. The one thing I'm convinced of (beyond the foundational principles of Christian teaching) is that I'm not a member of a dangerous cult. All areas of faith are open to examination.

On another point: Supposing that Christianity is founded upon extraterrestrial activity, so what?