Does Satan lack job satisfaction?

mossieh

From what I understand, he is apparently a powerful supernatural being, with the ability to travel great distances just by willing it, he can read minds and influence them and he is the master of another world filled with the souls of the damned. Right?

His job is what, exactly? To punish the wicked? To oppose (the supposedly omnipotent) god in the battle of armageddon? Was his assigned role purely to tempt Eve to kick off this whole shindig?

If I remember the story correctly, he rebelled against god and was cast down (not a great move admittedly - omnipotent boss) and since then, he has done, what? Tempted people? That's his job? To test peoples faith? Surely he is still then god's employee?

It sounds like a fairly crap job to be honest, for someone as powerful as he is, surely his motivation must be lacking at this stage?

Is it not possible that he's a convenient fall-guy for when christians screw up? "the devil made me do it!" Sure he did, after all, it's not like a powerful being like him has anything better to be doing.

If I was satan I'd wish myself nice house by a beach somewhere, some hot chicks and maybe a boat. Then I'd chill out nicely until armageddon, turn up, wave a white flag, then go home and chill out some more.

humanji

mossieh wrote: »

Was his assigned role purely to tempt Eve to kick off this whole shindig?

I thought it was a serpent, and not Satan that talked Eve into eating the apple?

oscarBravo

Anne Rice had an interesting take on the devil's role in the scheme of things, in her book Memnoch the Devil. Worth a read, even on its own, but ideally having read the rest of her vampire books, starting with Interview with the Vampire.

mossieh

humanji wrote: »

I thought it was a serpent, and not Satan that talked Eve into eating the apple?

Come on, you have to see the bigger picture. Although serpents are obviously treacherous and untrustworthy creatures by their very nature, I'm sure that this particular one was acting for satan, if not him in disguise. You don't have to be Jessica Fletcher to work that one out.

watty

Medieval Myth:
Satan is not the Master of Hell or anywhere. He is also unemployed having been sacked for having a bad attitude to the boss ("Can it be my turn to be Boss?" seems to have been the defining moment).

Book of Job suggests he is allowed to suggest that people are unfaithful. The Hebrew name means the accuser.

The Lake of Fire is the destination made for Satan (an Angel) and the other Angels that rebelled against God.
It's not intended for people. But Revelation suggests that the "rebels" of Armageddon will be sent there.

Serpent was either Satan or an agent. It wasn't an apple. That part of Genesis (Before Abram appears in Ur of Chaldeans') is highly allegorical, poetic and symbolic. Why anyone would try to interpret it literally is a mystery to me. Again, Medieval Influences. But it doesn't mention apples. In fact if there were apples, it was fine to eat them.

You don't have to believe any of this, but it's the original version.

kelly1

One other important detail - Satan can't read minds but using his intelligence he can have a bloody good guess.

mossieh

watty wrote: »

Medieval Myth:
Satan is not the Master of Hell or anywhere. He is also unemployed having been sacked for having a bad attitude to the boss ("Can it be my turn to be Boss?" seems to have been the defining moment).

Book of Job suggests he is allowed to suggest that people are unfaithful. The Hebrew name means the accuser.

The Lake of Fire is the destination made for Satan (an Angel) and the other Angels that rebelled against God.
It's not intended for people. But Revelation suggests that the "rebels" of Armageddon will be sent there.

Serpent was either Satan or an agent. It wasn't an apple. That part of Genesis (Before Abram appears in Ur of Chaldeans') is highly allegorical, poetic and symbolic. Why anyone would try to interpret it literally is a mystery to me. Again, Medieval Influences. But it doesn't mention apples. In fact if there were apples, it was fine to eat them.

You don't have to believe any of this, but it's the original version.

Do you think that satan has read the book of revelations? A bit of an eye-opener for him I'd say. A lake of fire? That sounds really bad. Really ,really bad.

kelly1 wrote: »

One other important detail - Satan can't read minds but using his intelligence he can have a bloody good guess.

Hmmm....this guy sounds less and less powerful all the time. I'm starting to feel sorry for him now. He's really getting gypped.
A. Kicked out of heaven.
B. Blamed for the fall of man.
C. Destined to lose at armageddon.
D. Dropped into a lake of fire. A lake of fire, like.

Rough justice.

nij

Satan has quite a lot of influence... Remember when he and God were shootin' the breeze one day and Satan made God do all the nasty stuff to Job for no reason? What got into God? I bet Satan slipped some rohypnol in his drink...

kelly1

mossieh wrote: »

Hmmm....this guy sounds less and less powerful all the time. I'm starting to feel sorry for him now. He's really getting gypped.
A. Kicked out of heaven.
B. Blamed for the fall of man.
C. Destined to lose at armageddon.
D. Dropped into a lake of fire. A lake of fire, like.

Rough justice.

My advice, never ever have sympathy for the devil. God knows exactly what He's doing. The devil before being cast into Hell saw the glory of God. He could see the beatific vision unlike us. But his pride got the better of him and he fought against his creator and still does. I believe God can use the devil as a tool for our betterment (increased humility etc). e.g. we start leading a good life and then fall due to our pride. The devil in this case was used by God to show how we can't lead good lives without God's grace and our will to do His will.

God bless,
Noel.

daveharnett

mossieh wrote: »

Rough justice.

Well, old testament god didn't take any s**t.

• Flooding the planet
• Exterminating the citizens of Soddom & Gomorrah
• Murdering Egypt's children

Not like this hippy do-nothing 'can't we all just get along?' new testament god.

Who knew that having your kid crucified could mellow a guy.

nij

Now now Dave, God only flooded the planet coz we turned out wrong and had wicked thoughts! He f*cked up big time when he made us. Ah well, there's one for the blooper reel!

But hey, given that we're about 1,000,000 times worse today, I think another flood is in order!

Zombrex

kelly1 wrote: »

My advice, never ever have sympathy for the devil. God knows exactly what He's doing.

Apparently not, since he created the devil in the first place ...

kelly1 wrote: »

I believe God can use the devil as a tool for our betterment (increased humility etc). e.g. we start leading a good life and then fall due to our pride. The devil in this case was used by God to show how we can't lead good lives without God's grace and our will to do His will.

Well yes but if the devil didn't exist we wouldn't have pride and therefore wouldn't need a guide to turn us away from getting to proud. Pride is a sin and the devil is supposed to have been the temptation of Adam and Eve leading them to break God's commandment and brought sin into the world causing God to condemn all humanity afterwards.

daveharnett

mossieh wrote: »

serpents are obviously treacherous and untrustworthy creatures by their very nature

Now mossie, that's an unfair generalization. If that were true, how did they get a place on the ark?

mossieh

daveharnett wrote: »

Well, old testament god didn't take any s**t.

• Flooding the planet
• Exterminating the citizens of Soddom & Gomorrah
• Murdering Egypt's children

Not like this hippy do-nothing 'can't we all just get along?' new testament god.

Who knew that having your kid crucified could mellow a guy.

God is mysterious, that's for sure (although those old testament people had it coming to them, they were warned, in fairness). Still, seeing as he is all hippyfied now, surely he and satan should bury the hatchet?

nij wrote: »

Now now Dave, God only flooded the planet coz we turned out wrong and had wicked thoughts! He f*cked up big time when he made us. Ah well, there's one for the blooper reel!

But hey, given that we're about 1,000,000 times worse today, I think another flood is in order!

Shhhhhhhh!

Wicknight wrote: »

Apparently not, since he created the devil in the first place ...

Yeah and in fairness, he created Dick Cheney, Hitler and Louis Walsh too...he has a fairly long history of screwing up, I just can't see why satan gets all the blame for these things.

mossieh

daveharnett wrote: »

Now mossie, that's an unfair generalization. If that were true, how did they get a place on the ark?

When you think of snakes, what's the first adjective that comes to mind? That's right, SNEAKY! No accident. Wanderly Wagon taught me everything I need to know in life.

They probably weren't even supposed to be in the ark, probably hid in the jacks or something.

Asiaprod

daveharnett, mossieh, nij consider this the only warning you will receive.
If you wish to keep posting here, read the the charter and abide by it.

1. Arguments such as "There is no God, therefore..." or "The Bible is full of contradictions, therefore..." will not be tolerated. Don't start off with a conclusion which your audience is bound to disagree with!
2. Unreasonable antagonism to particular Christian churches (typically but not always Catholicism) will not be tolerated. or their belief.
3. Do not post anything intended to inflame or insult. This is meant to be a place of debate where you can challenge ideas all you like but don't go outside boundaries of taste or decency and don't get personal.

Thanks
Asia

mossieh

Duly noted Asia but I do have a real question behind all of this.
It seems to me that christians today do seem increasingly uncomfortable/sceptical regarding the existence and role of satan in their belief system. Why is this? Why does there seem to be a general will to airbrush him out of the picture?
I was raised as a catholic and attended (and served) mass every week until my mid teens and I don't ever remember a priest talking at any length about satan. It seems on the face of it, a fairly major omission. The only exception would be whenever the redemptorist mission came to town, they gave it a bit of fire and brimstone alright. So, is this a-la-carte christianity or indicative of something else, is it a bridge too far in terms of credulity?

You must not have been reading the Halloween thread on this forum, mossieh

Asiaprod

mossieh wrote: »

Duly noted Asia but I do have a real question behind all of this.

I am happy to see genuine questions. Please feel free to seek your answers. For the record nij did not see fit to abide by the rules and is no longer with us.
Thanks for your understanding.
Asia

mossieh

bluewolf wrote: »

You must not have been reading the Halloween thread on this forum, mossieh

Actually that thread prompted this one. Whilst the more dogmatic posters on here like Noel et al, (no offense intended Noel) are quite vocal about satan, I'm more curious about the less forthright christians views on this.

Come on folks, nail your colours to the mast here.

Do you believe in satan? I don't mean satan as some kind of metaphor for the evil in men's hearts but the actual satan written about in the bible.

JimiTime

mossieh wrote: »

Do you believe in satan? I don't mean satan as some kind of metaphor for the evil in men's hearts but the actual satan written about in the bible.

Yes. Any good Christian does not need to know much about him. Be aware that he is a liar and a deciever, who wants to see us fail. I don't believe in 'hell' as a place of everlasting life in fiery torment, as I don't see the biblical evidence that some more dogmatic christians would.

robindch

the actual satan written about in the bible.

It's been mentioned before, but the characters of the devil/satan/lucifer/etc are quite different in different parts of the bible, so it's rather difficult to focus on one depiction, since there isn't one to focus upon.

mossieh

robindch wrote: »

It's been mentioned before, but the characters of the devil/satan/lucifer/etc are quite different in different parts of the bible, so it's rather difficult to focus on one depiction, since there isn't one to focus upon.

Do you get the gist of my question Robin?

philologos

JimiTime wrote: »

Yes. Any good Christian does not need to know much about him. Be aware that he is a liar and a deciever, who wants to see us fail. I don't believe in 'hell' as a place of everlasting life in fiery torment, as I don't see the biblical evidence that some more dogmatic christians would.

after reading the book of Revelations it notes that those who have not been chosen to be written in the Lamb's (Jesus') Book of Life, will experience a second death. Perhaps we should discuss the role of hell in another thread?

JimiTime

Jakkass wrote: »

after reading the book of Revelations it notes that those who have not been chosen to be written in the Lamb's (Jesus') Book of Life, will experience a second death. Perhaps we should discuss the role of hell in another thread?

By all means.

robindch

mossieh wrote:

Do you get the gist of my question Robin?

Yes, I did, but as I'm not a christian any more, I refrained from replying to it for various reasons. However, you have asked again, so here goes.

mossieh wrote:

Do you believe in satan? I don't mean satan as some kind of metaphor for the evil in men's hearts but the actual satan written about in the bible.

No, I don't believe that the character of Satan, as generally understood in christianity, exists. However, I'd follow that up by saying that the idea that he exists is quite common and that this idea that there is such a character -- directly responsible for prompting all the world's evil -- is useful for two principal reasons.

Firstly, it's a mechanism to permit the kind of denial of personal responsibility which is vital in societies which have poorly-developed dispute-resolution systems, such as those in the OT. In simpler terms, it allows people, plausibly, to say "He made me do it!", and thereby hopefully avoid igniting the kinds of destructive vendettas which are common in pre-judicial societies.

Secondly, it's a skyhook onto which somebody can hang an explanation for the existence of what they perceive as the "evil" of the world, including bad luck, anti-social behavior, physical and mental illnesses and so on.

There are other incidental reasons that the idea has persisted, but I'd imagine that these are the top two.

mossieh

robindch wrote: »

Yes, I did, but as I'm not a christian any more, I refrained from replying to it for various reasons. However, you have asked again, so here goes.No, I don't believe that the character of Satan, as generally understood in christianity, exists. However, I'd follow that up by saying that the idea that he exists is quite common and that this idea that there is such a character -- directly responsible for prompting all the world's evil -- is useful for two principal reasons.

Firstly, it's a mechanism to permit the kind of denial of personal responsibility which is vital in societies which have poorly-developed dispute-resolution systems, such as those in the OT. In simpler terms, it allows people, plausibly, to say "He made me do it!", and thereby hopefully avoid igniting the kinds of destructive vendettas which are common in pre-judicial societies.

Secondly, it's a skyhook onto which somebody can hang an explanation for the existence of what they perceive as the "evil" of the world, including bad luck, anti-social behavior, physical and mental illnesses and so on.

There are other incidental reasons that the idea has persisted, but I'd imagine that these are the top two.

Good post. I think that this explanation causes a certain amount of embarrassment to christians who can see the sense of it but whose faith requires they believe otherwise. It's the best explanation I can think of for the general reticence shown towards discussing a character who had some fairly pivotal roles in the bible stories.

BrianCalgary

mossieh wrote: »

Good post. I think that this explanation causes a certain amount of embarrassment to christians who can see the sense of it but whose faith requires they believe otherwise. It's the best explanation I can think of for the general reticence shown towards discussing a character who had some fairly pivotal roles in the bible stories.

It would cause embarrasment if Satan was never mentioned in the Bible as a real being.

Christ was tempted by him in teh desert.
He is thrown into teh lake of fire in Revelation.
Jesus chases demons out of people in the gospels.
Jesus even says 'get behind me Satan'.

So, in the NT he is ral. In the OT he' real. He mixes it up with Job, he is present in Genesis.

JoeB-

kelly1 wrote: »

The devil before being cast into Hell saw the glory of God. He could see the beatific vision unlike us. But his pride got the better of him and he fought against his creator and still does.

Noel.

This isn't true I don't think.

I asked the question of how the devil fell in the thread titled 'How did the devil fall'. I gave three reasons I could think of... it turned out that the devil was tricked by God... i.e God DIDN'T reveal himself in all his glory but required submission with no evidence given of his supernatural status, naturally the devil refused and has been punished every since.

Take this example...
a man calls to your house and says' Hi, I'm God, please kneel'... so you refuse, then your visitor says again 'Come on now, I really am God, please kneel'.. so again you refuse...

Then your visitor rips off his disguise and says 'Hard luck buddy, I really am God and now you will suffer your unbelief for all eternity'...

WHAT????
Can God really behave like that? Is that reasonable behaviour? But that is what he apparently did to the devil.

And it gets worse... God being omnipotent knew exactly what the outcome would be, and so God must have wanted the outcome..

I believe the main problem with an omnipotent God is that ultimitely he is responsible for everything... people say we have free will and such to attempt to deny Gods responsibility for everything but that is only word games in my view... God is ultimitely responsible for everything, including my unbelief.

And finally belief in God isn't a choice, people either belive or they don't.. people cannot choose to believe, so God choosing to punish people for not believing in something unproven is a joke ... similar to how God punished the unbelieving door opener in my earlier story... it is not unreasonable to expect people to believe in things with no proof...

JoeB-

Pope John Paul II reportedly said 'Those who don't believe in the devil (as a real being) don't believe in the Gospel (i.e in Jesus)'

So catholics have an obligation to believe in the devil as a real creature, as they have an obligation to believe in possensions by the devil.. and exorcisms.

PDN

JoeBallantine wrote: »

This isn't true I don't think.

I asked the question of how the devil fell in the thread titled 'How did the devil fall'. I gave three reasons I could think of... it turned out that the devil was tricked by God... i.e God DIDN'T reveal himself in all his glory but required submission with no evidence given of his supernatural status, naturally the devil refused and has been punished every since.

Take this example...
a man calls to your house and says' Hi, I'm God, please kneel'... so you refuse, then your visitor says again 'Come on now, I really am God, please kneel'.. so again you refuse...

Then your visitor rips off his disguise and says 'Hard luck buddy, I really am God and now you will suffer your unbelief for all eternity'...

WHAT????
Can God really behave like that? Is that reasonable behaviour? But that is what he apparently did to the devil.

And it gets worse... God being omnipotent knew exactly what the outcome would be, and so God must have wanted the outcome..

I believe the main problem with an omnipotent God is that ultimitely he is responsible for everything... people say we have free will and such to attempt to deny Gods responsibility for everything but that is only word games in my view... God is ultimitely responsible for everything, including my unbelief.

And finally belief in God isn't a choice, people either belive or they don't.. people cannot choose to believe, so God choosing to punish people for not believing in something unproven is a joke ... similar to how God punished the unbelieving door opener in my earlier story... it is not unreasonable to expect people to believe in things with no proof...

First off, we have no reason at all to think that the Devil was tricked, that would entirely be human speculation. I think it much more likely that Satan knew exactly who God was (especially if, as many believe, he was an angelic being created for the express purpose of worshipping God) but that he chose to rebel because he had a puffed up idea of his own abilities and actually thought he could win in a rebellion.

Belief very often is a choice. I'm reminded of a story I read many years ago. I believe it was Paul Little, a Scripture Union evangelist, who used to speak in many Universities and take questions from often hostile groups of students during the 1970s. On one occasion he was fielding a string of questions from one student who seemed particularly antagonistic. Eventually Little asked, "Look, if I can answer every one of your questions to your satisfaction, then will you become a Christian?" The answer was very honest - "No, I won't." When pressed as to why not, the student continued, "Because becoming a Christian would mess up my life too much. I want to live life my way." That is what we call willful unbelief.

God does not send anyone to Hell because they were ignorant of the truth. People choose to go to Hell by deliberately rejecting the truth.

Akrasia

robindch wrote: »

Yes, I did, but as I'm not a christian any more, I refrained from replying to it for various reasons. However, you have asked again, so here goes.No, I don't believe that the character of Satan, as generally understood in christianity, exists. However, I'd follow that up by saying that the idea that he exists is quite common and that this idea that there is such a character -- directly responsible for prompting all the world's evil -- is useful for two principal reasons.

Firstly, it's a mechanism to permit the kind of denial of personal responsibility which is vital in societies which have poorly-developed dispute-resolution systems, such as those in the OT. In simpler terms, it allows people, plausibly, to say "He made me do it!", and thereby hopefully avoid igniting the kinds of destructive vendettas which are common in pre-judicial societies.

Secondly, it's a skyhook onto which somebody can hang an explanation for the existence of what they perceive as the "evil" of the world, including bad luck, anti-social behavior, physical and mental illnesses and so on.

There are other incidental reasons that the idea has persisted, but I'd imagine that these are the top two.

I think another important role for satan is that he allows christians leeway to acknowledge the emotion of hate as well as the emotion of love. You must love god (and all his creation) with all your heart, but you can hate the devil and his agents (and his agents can be pretty much anyone who isn't a fully paid up christian, from "Witches" to Atheists)

PDN

Akrasia wrote: »

I think another important role for satan is that he allows christians leeway to acknowledge the emotion of hate as well as the emotion of love. You must love god (and all his creation) with all your heart, but you can hate the devil and his agents (and his agents can be pretty much anyone who isn't a fully paid up christian, from "Witches" to Atheists)

It would be totally wrong for any Christian to hate another human being, be they a witch, an atheist, a paedophile or even a member of Fianna Fail.

That is not to say that some Christians do not hate other people. There are always Christians who fail to live up to the requirements of Christianity, just as there are Christians who lie, gossip, steal, commit adultery etc. But to pretend that belief in Satan justifies hatred towards others is totally false.

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

I think it much more likely that Satan knew exactly who God was (especially if, as many believe, he was an angelic being created for the express purpose of worshipping God) but that he chose to rebel because he had a puffed up idea of his own abilities and actually thought he could win in a rebellion.

Satan believed he could win a "battle" against an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient being?

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

The only way Satan could believe that is if Satan didn't know what God actually was.

Since Satan was an angel he did know what God was.

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

Satan believed he could win a "battle" against an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient being?

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

The only way Satan could believe that is if Satan didn't know what God actually was.

Since Satan was an angel he did know what God was.

Sin often doesn't make sense. Men think they will get away with cheating on their wives when it's obvious that the end result will be divorce and Saturday mornings in the museum or MacDonald's with the kids. Bank employees swindle their employers out of millions and then seem genuinely surprised that they get exposed and prosecuted. Teenagers, despite enough sex education to convince even the thickest moron of the dangers, have unprotected sex and believe they won't get pregnant or catch an STD. Bush invades Iraq even though it's perfectly obvious that it will be another Vietnam. If you only allowed for actions that 'make sense' then you would have to reject 90% of world history as impossible.

none of those are angels with a direct experience of an omnipotent god

PDN

bluewolf wrote: »

none of those are angels with a direct experience of an omnipotent god

If you have any historical examples of the interaction between angels and an omnipotent God then please share them with us.

The point of my examples was to demonstrate that the assertion that an action 'wouldn't make sense' is in no way an argument for that action not having taken place. As far as I am aware there is no theological or philosophical basis for arguing that an angel can only take actions that 'make sense'.

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

Sin often doesn't make sense. Men think they will get away with cheating on their wives when it's obvious that the end result will be divorce and Saturday mornings in the museum or MacDonald's with the kids. Bank employees swindle their employers out of millions and then seem genuinely surprised that they get exposed and prosecuted. Teenagers, despite enough sex education to convince even the thickest moron of the dangers, have unprotected sex and believe they won't get pregnant or catch an STD. Bush invades Iraq even though it's perfectly obvious that it will be another Vietnam. If you only allowed for actions that 'make sense' then you would have to reject 90% of world history as impossible.

Yes but in all those examples the person believes there is a possibility that they can get away with it. That is because there is actually a possibility that they can get away with it, albeit very very small and unlikely.

But by the very definition of God, Satan could never get away with it. It wasn't possible. Defeating God is an oxymoron, God by definition cannot be defeated since God can do anything and has absolute power.

So either it didn't happen like that, or Satan is the most ridiculously stupid creature in all existence.

Either way I don't think people need not worry too much.