posted
BB, Okay, so if I were Satan, I'd try to make people happy (or trick them into thinking that they are). As such, how is that a good determiner for being on the right side?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
BB, If God determines for us what is good and what is evil, how do we know that God himself is good and not just using this light of Christ to make us think he's good? I would think that we'd have to be able to distinguish good and evil on our own independently in order to recognize that God himself is good.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: BB, Okay, so if I were Satan, I'd try to make people happy (or trick them into thinking that they are). As such, how is that a good determiner for being on the right side?
That is a very good question, but I must politely decline to answer in full for now as I need to go to classes.
I will tell you that Satan is incapable of suggesting that we do something that is entirely good. His suggestions are always corrupt or counterfeit versions of what is right.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I will tell you that Satan is incapable of suggesting that we do something that is entirely good. His suggestions are always corrupt or counterfeit versions of what is right.
Why? Satan wasn't always a completely evil creature. He surely wasn't created that way.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If we are unable to see good on our own, and can only know that something is good by trusting an unverifiable outside source, how can we ever have any judgment on our own? We can't freely choose to do good, we can only freely choose to follow the spiritual advice the Light of Christ (we presume) gives us.
How would we be able to tell if Satan were tricking us into thinking we are doing good, while we were actually doing evil, if we have no capacity to recognize good on our own?
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You said we have to choose good, but we can only know that it's good when the Light of Christ shows us that it's good. If I can only do something with the assistance of an outside force, I don't consider that I'm completely free in doing it. If I ignore the outside force, and try to do it on my own, I am incapable.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:That's like asking how we are supposed to stand if there is no gravity. It's not an issue.
Of course it is. Either God doesn't respect free will and forces Christ's light on us or it is possible to be without Christ's light.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't want God forcing his interference on me and changing how I make decisions. How is that not a free will issue?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
You said earlier that God couldn't eliminate the option to do evil, because that would take away our free will. Why doesn't it take away our free will when he just limits our action a little bit? Why not a little bit more?
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
What do you mean? Are you saying that the existence of the light of Christ limits our actions?
It isn't like that at all. It's like...having all the evidentiary documents in a case available to a judge before he decides. The existence of evidence doesn't take away the judge's freedom to decide badly (or wisely).
People are entirely capable of behaving monstrously in spite of it.
Posts: 1753 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Apparently Satan has no free will.
posted
kat, I'll ask again, is this light of Christ dependent on the culture that the person is in and if not, why did so many people do things we now regard as evil with a clear and even joyous conscience?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That's like asking how we are supposed to stand if there is no gravity. It's not an issue. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course it is. Either God doesn't respect free will and forces Christ's light on us or it is possible to be without Christ's light.
Gravity is an ever present force that affects you without depriving you of free will. I imagine that's kind of the way Kat views the Light of Christ (Kat: correct me if I'm wrong). Maybe like a compass that can help you find your way, but you still have to decide what course you actually take. However, I don't agree with the idea that a person is incapable of finding his way on his own.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
camus, Christ's Light must be something added to a person, otherwise it would just be part of that person and not granted to him from an outside source. It is something that apparently changes how you make decisions. Thus, if a person does not want it, God is chaging the way they make decisions against their will. To me, that's a clear violation of free will.
Unlike Christ's Light, gravity does not affect the way you make decisions. It is a property of the things you make decisions about.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sometimes I'm frightened by the number of religious folks in America, because it seems at times - this conversation as a prime example - that the world views and basic assumptions of theists and atheists can be at such odds that we can't make ourselves understood to each other.
I can see what JH and BB are saying, the words all make sense individually, but it doesn't make logical sense to me. I'm guessing that they might have a similar view about my take on things.
It seems that the very foundation upon which we discuss - the way logic works for each of us, what we understand as freedom vs. bondage or enabling vs. constraining, the conclusions we draw from a given statement - are all so out of phase that we keep trying to find ways of saying what we mean in different ways, but they all end up being something the other side can't understand or won't accept.
I might, for example, say "The trinity is three things. You can't have three things that are one thing. That makes no logical sense just based on the nature of objects and the way math works."
A Christian might then reply, "Obviously you can have three things which are all one, in the special case of the Holy Trinity, because that's exactly what it is."
I'd have as much luck finding the Loch Ness monster by looking in my bathtub while putting a bicycle in the sink.
Hold on, that's actually a perfect analogy for the Problem of Evil. It all makes sense now. Never mind then.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:It is something that apparently changes how you make decisions.
I'm not quite sure how you got that from kat's definition. It sounded to me like the Light of Christ is a way to measure good and evil, to compare your standards to God's. Whether a person agrees with those standards is completely up to each individual.
That's why I think I like the compass analogy. The Light of Christ could be compared to the effect of the earth's magnetic field. If your spiritual compass is attuned to it, it can provide direction in life. You are also free to completely ignore it or disagree with what it says. Whether God's view of goodness and evil is important to you and is a factor in the decisions you make is completely up to you.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Camus, I think that analogy only works if people are unable to determine direction by any means except a compass, and are unable to go north except when they use the compass to do so.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
MC, And that's where I take exception to Kat's assertion. She implies that you can only find your way or direction (to do Good) by using the compass (or Light of Christ). I think people are completely capable of finding their way without having to rely completely on her definition of God.
Edit to add: Of course, I also disagree that there's some absolute standard of Goodness.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MightyCow: A Christian might then reply, "Obviously you can have three things which are all one, in the special case of the Holy Trinity, because that's exactly what it is."
More focused on Catholics actually. IIRC, during the early days of the Reformation, there were pretty harsh words exchanged about the nature of the trinity between Protestants and Catholics. Although that antipathy seems to have died down now.
Of course, the key is to realize that God is really just the Three Musketeers of deities, "All for one, and one for all" Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:You choose which force you are going to support as you cannot support both. God did not create the force we call good, he has simply attuned himself to it perfectly. That is it, the end. If you chose to support God you become an agent unto yourself for good (is that not freedom?). If you support Satan he dominates you and makes you his slave in misery.
If only the world were as black and white as that. If only each and every act could be easily filed away under the concept of "good" or "evil". Decisions would be so easy. We would have no need to discuss moral and ethical issues with each other to determine the proper course of action. There would be no need for a judge to determine someone's sentence, because no special circumstances would ever matter when it comes down to "evil" or "good".
Furthermore, even if I did agree with your above statement, I reject the idea that you choose to support god, and thus become an agent for good. I choose to support "good" and if that aligns me with god, great. You might look at this as an unimportant distinction as in your eyes god and good are one and the same, but to me it makes a world of difference. It's a matter of doing good for the sake of doing good, because from reason, logic, emotion, empathy, i've decided it is the best way to act, rather than doing good because i think i'm told to or for whatever other reason.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, I don't have time right now to read the whole thread but a glance at this page looks like my "thanks for the link, Noemon, quite a story" post is going to be highly irrelevant to the discussion at hand. But thanks anyway.
Posts: 3149 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I will tell you that Satan is incapable of suggesting that we do something that is entirely good. His suggestions are always corrupt or counterfeit versions of what is right.
I made a mistake in using the word incapable. What I meant to say is that Satan will not cause anyone to do anything entirely good. Just as God simply does not choose to do evil, Satan does not choose to do good. God would cease to be God if he did something evil and Satan would cease to be a devil if he chose to do something good.
quote:If only the world were as black and white as that. If only each and every act could be easily filed away under the concept of "good" or "evil". Decisions would be so easy. We would have no need to discuss moral and ethical issues with each other to determine the proper course of action. There would be no need for a judge to determine someone's sentence, because no special circumstances would ever matter when it comes down to "evil" or "good".
Why does it matter that THIS world is not black and white? IMO we are here specifically to learn all the nuances of right and wrong. To fully realize what the fruits of righteousness and iniquity are. That includes making good and bad decisions. I refuse to believe that given enough time an individual could not learn all there is to know about ethics and rightness/wrongness. Maybe the entire process is not completed in this lifetime, but why does that even matter? We choose what we want to do with our time given and live with the consequences.
quote:Furthermore, even if I did agree with your above statement, I reject the idea that you choose to support god, and thus become an agent for good. I choose to support "good" and if that aligns me with god, great. You might look at this as an unimportant distinction as in your eyes god and good are one and the same, but to me it makes a world of difference. It's a matter of doing good for the sake of doing good, because from reason, logic, emotion, empathy, i've decided it is the best way to act, rather than doing good because i think i'm told to or for whatever other reason.
I fail to see how what you just said is contrary to what I have already said in previous posts.
I most certainly do choose to support that which is good, with or without the approval of a diety. However, since God embodies all that is good, by serving the good I inevitably must conclude that listening to God is good. Since he created me and my existance is continually reliant on Him, I already to an extent owe him some alligience. Even more, since He loves me completely, and wishes to share all that he has with me, I am quite comfortable, in fact I am eager to involve Him deeply in my affairs.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
BlackBlade, you believe that there are ultimate, universal definitions of "good" and "evil," which are not only capable of being learned by humans but which the defining of is our goal here on Earth AND when these are finally defined and applied, will, no matter the circumstance, be* wholly good and righteous, and will benefit all for the better?
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: What I meant to say is that Satan will not cause anyone to do anything entirely good. Just as God simply does not choose to do evil, Satan does not choose to do good. God would cease to be God if he did something evil and Satan would cease to be a devil if he chose to do something good.
How did Satan become so absolute? He started as good, but then chose evil by fighting against god. What's to stop Satan from changing his mind and doing good?
The argument works for God because God has no history of being anything other than good. But Satan has been shown to be a "flip flopper".
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
Of course, you don't really know that for sure. In fact, you can't know that for sure. [Edit]Especially if God determines for you what is good and evil. You're taking his word for it that he is good, and since you've defined goodness to include everything that God is, does, and says, you can't possibly see it any other way.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
My mother gave birth to me, and I owe her some allegiance. And yet, if she murdered someone, asked me to murder someone, or committed acts that I would consider evil based on my morals, that allegiance would end, even if the whole time she loved me completely. Being created by someone does not necessitate the creator being all good.
Also, why is your existence continually reliant on him? Your creation might have been, but if you're saying that god can come in and end your life at any moment, then I have some more questions about free will. If i'm to take that to mean that if someone shoots you and you die, you look at is god taking away the existence you gave you. This would pose some problems for the free will you've been talking about in regards to a person's choice to do good or evil.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:BlackBlade, you believe that there are ultimate, universal definitions of "good" and "evil," which are not only capable of being learned by humans but which the defining of is our goal here on Earth AND when these are finally defined and applied, will, no matter the circumstance, be wholly good and righteous, and will benefit all for the better?
Did you mean be instead of by? If so, I think that's an accurate statement, I had to read it a few times.
quote:How did Satan become so absolute? He started as good, but then chose evil by fighting against god. What's to stop Satan from changing his mind and doing good?
If God, the arbiter of Good cannot persuade you to turn away from evil, what can?
quote: The argument works for God because God has no history of being anything other than good. But Satan has been shown to be a "flip flopper".
In Mormon theology God has not ALWAYS been God.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Of course, you don't really know that for sure. In fact, you can't know that for sure. [Edit]Especially if God determines for you what is good and evil. You're taking his word for it that he is good, and since you've defined goodness to include everything that God is, does, and says, you can't possibly see it any other way.
Numerous people make this point and my response has always been. We are assuming God is completely good, embodies all that is good. If we discard this assumption there isn't much to talk about anyway as who can stand against an all powerful being bent on doing what he wants with us?
quote: My mother gave birth to me, and I owe her some allegiance. And yet, if she murdered someone, asked me to murder someone, or committed acts that I would consider evil based on my morals, that allegiance would end, even if the whole time she loved me completely. Being created by someone does not necessitate the creator being all good.
You are right, but God does not do any of those things, or more accurately if God were to ask me to "murder" somebody, He'd have to call down higher principles ultimately that made that request make sense to me. God spends all His time trying to help me grow, thus my allegience continues.
quote:Also, why is your existence continually reliant on him? Your creation might have been, but if you're saying that god can come in and end your life at any moment, then I have some more questions about free will. If i'm to take that to mean that if someone shoots you and you die, you look at is god taking away the existence you gave you. This would pose some problems for the free will you've been talking about in regards to a person's choice to do good or evil.
I do not have very deeply developed opinions on whether God conciously keeps everyone alive, or whether he just sets things in motion and interferes when He does. I do believe that there is a greatest good, of which only God is fully aware of, and hence he gives and takes away life so as to create that greatest good.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If we discard this assumption there isn't much to talk about anyway as who can stand against an all powerful being bent on doing what he wants with us?
Well, I may not be able to stand against an evil, all powerful being, but I would most certainly not give it my allegiance.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
According to God He did try. Thanks for the acknowledgment.
quote:Well, I may not be able to stand against an evil, all powerful being, but I would most certainly not give it my allegiance.
If I recall King Of Men had some interesting views on how to deal with an all powerful diety that was not kind and benevolent.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: If God, the arbiter of Good cannot persuade you to turn away from evil, what can?
If God cannot convince me to agree with his standard of Goodness, then I would think that there is no ultimate definition of Goodness.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If God cannot convince me to agree with his standard of Goodness, then I would think that there is no ultimate definition of Goodness.
Or perhaps you have chosen not to persue goodness. I'm sure if you asked Satan he would disagree on God's definition of goodness.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do you know what Satan's view of goodness is besides what God wants you to think it is? When you only hear one side of the story, I'm not sure why the default is to believe that the side you hear from is the most accurate view.
Edit: Further, I thought the accusation against Satan was not that he disagreed with what Goodness was but that Satan was just plain evil. If Satan honestly thought what he was doing was good, then I think he's being portrayed incorrectly.
Posts: 1256 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
According to God He did try. Thanks for the acknowledgment.
Any time BB.
I disagree with you about nearly everything theologically, but you're very intelligent and you seem like good people. Hopefully I come off as somewhat close to that, hehe.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Satan does not choose to do good. God would cease to be God if he did something evil and Satan would cease to be a devil if he chose to do something good.
What's in it for Satan to be a devil (by your definition)? I don't see why he couldn't be just as devillish if he did good occasionally. In fact, you can argue it'd make him far more effectively evil.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Satan does not choose to do good. God would cease to be God if he did something evil and Satan would cease to be a devil if he chose to do something good.
What's in it for Satan to be a devil (by your definition)? I don't see why he couldn't be just as devillish if he did good occasionally. In fact, you can argue it'd make him far more effectively evil.
I think BB covered that when he said Satan wouldn't do anything entirely good.
So he'll give you some candy (good), but only to lure you into oncoming traffic (not so good).
Or something like that.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:BlackBlade, you believe that there are ultimate, universal definitions of "good" and "evil," which are not only capable of being learned by humans but which the defining of is our goal here on Earth AND when these are finally defined and applied, will, no matter the circumstance, be wholly good and righteous, and will benefit all for the better?
Did you mean be instead of by? If so, I think that's an accurate statement, I had to read it a few times.
Yes, be, not by.
I don't know that I follow how that could ever be the case. In fact, didn't Jesus show that even if the law is a good law, that doesn't mean we can't show empathy and compassion based on certain circumstances? His saving of the adulteress from being stoned, for instance. What would the universal law be, there? "Always condemn adulteresses, except those who the Son of God randomly chooses to spare to prove a point about the perils of immutable laws and lack of compassion for our fellow man's imperfections?"
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think BB covered that when he said Satan wouldn't do anything entirely good.
So he'll give you some candy (good), but only to lure you into oncoming traffic (not so good).
But why couldn't he just give you some candy because you wanted it and he had some? Sure, that might mean that he'd stop being a devil for a few seconds -- but there's no special power granted to a "devil," is there?
God gets certain powers by virtue of being God, so He has an incentive to only do good things. Satan doesn't, so there's no reason for him not to be good occasionally.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure, too, that I'm completely understanding BlackBlade's conception of "Satan" -- he's just a fallen angel, isn't he? I'm not sure if that's the accepted definition in Mormon theology.
Posts: 3516 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
All this hidden information, inability to make choices on our own, and so forth seems like a description the ultimate cosmic con game to me. If Satan were actually the one providing the Light Which Allows Us to Choose Stuff, we would have no way of knowing it was the Light of Evil, since we have no way of judging what the light shows us (which we presume is Goodness) except by the light.
If it were actually the Light Of Lucifer (rather than Christ) we would wrongly believe it to be Good, as we have no inherent ability to judge correctly that is able to disagree with the light.
Then our choices would be between Evil - ignoring the light, and Different Evil Pretending to be Good - following the light.
Presumably Satan has no qualms about limiting our free will.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Do you know what Satan's view of goodness is besides what God wants you to think it is? When you only hear one side of the story, I'm not sure why the default is to believe that the side you hear from is the most accurate view.
Edit: Further, I thought the accusation against Satan was not that he disagreed with what Goodness was but that Satan was just plain evil. If Satan honestly thought what he was doing was good, then I think he's being portrayed incorrectly.
Again an all powerful being who is not truly good can do as he pleases with us, not much we can do stop him.
The account of Satan's journey from Son of the Morning to Son of Perdition is not one that is perfectly explained. What is clear, if we add in the Mormon canon, is that Satan was once one of God's highest favored children. When confronted with God's plan for all His spirit creations He posited his own modifications (specifically direct control over everyone's actions/thoughts)to God's plan and his changes were rejected. Rather then submit to God's plan He rebelled and attempted to convince as many of God's children to join his insurrection. It is revealed that Satan's plan all along was to userp God's position and to rule over everything. Satan and those who chose him over God were expelled from Heaven and sent to earth. Here they willingly continue Satan's work of convincing those who are born here to rebel against God.
Satan could be called a fallen angel, but he seems to have a certain bounds and powers that are not discussed in the scriptures, except in an aside sort of way.
Apparently he and his followers can inhabit the bodies of those living, appear to us, speak to us, reason with us, suggest ideas into our minds, and in some cases physically harm us. The more heed we give them the more power they can exert over us.
But where Satan derives his power from is unclear, and exactly what he can and can't do is not elaborated on anywhere.
quote:God gets certain powers by virtue of being God, so He has an incentive to only do good things. Satan doesn't, so there's no reason for him not to be good occasionally.
*I* think Satan does indeed get powers for siding with evil, from a source I know nothing of. I don't think God granted him any power.
By following the principles of evil he grows in understanding of that particular brand of power.
I don't really wish to discuss Lucifer much more, very little is said about him, most of it is conjecture and opinion.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Squick, MC - From my perspective, the problem that you two and kat/BB are having is based on different definitions of what free will means.
From what I'm reading, it appears that you don't acknowledge the existence of soft determinism. That is, you believe that free will must be libertarian: our choices cannot be influenced by anything (such as, say, God) if they are to remain perfectly free. Now, setting aside the numerous problems with such a stance, I want to talk a bit more about Mormon theology.
The position BB and kat are advocating here is similar to prevenient grace in more mainline Christian theology, which holds that since we were utterly corrupted by the fall, we required God's help to allow us to choose good from evil. Squick holds that this help in itself is an imposition upon free will, but it seems to me that that's begging the question a bit, because he's coming from different assumptions from the Mormons or Methodists that believe in prevenient grace. That is, Squick doesn't believe that humanity ever existed in a situation that made such a thing necessary. So, while he - coming from a libertarian free will standpoint - sees such grace (or, if you like, light of Christ) as an imposition from God, kat and BB see it from a soft determinist perspective; that is, they believe that, yes, our choices are affected (or even determined) by the presence of an outside force, but that does not mean they are not still free. Folks like Thomas Hobbes believed this, so they're not in bad company.
Now, Mormon theology. Mormons are in a unique position here, because, unlike most classical Christianity, there's a great deal of theological ground to argue that God is not the source of all good or evil; these things exist separately from him (and indeed, there's some question as to whether these concept actually exist in the Platonic sense - whether there are universal *moral* as opposed to *physical* laws in the universe). This is because of a second proposition extant in Mormon thought: that being, we are not created by God; that our intelligences and will exist separately from him and are beyond his control. These two ideas, obviously, are intertwined.
So, what about the light of Christ or grace or whatnot? The concept of the 'light of Christ' is present, as kat indicated, in the Book of Mormon, but it's quite nebulous. Lots of people identify it as the conscience, but, of course, as Squick noted, such a thing is largely dependent upon cultural conditioning. What do we do with that? It's possible, as other Mormon thinkers have, to essentially identify the light of Christ with the promptings of the Holy Spirit; that is, guidance from God based upon his far superior knowledge of the way things happen to be. Other folks have essentially equated it with the prevenient grace that Wesley spoke of; that is, it is that result of the atonement that allows us to identify the godly in the world despite our fallen natures. That particular wording hasn't caught on because of Mormon thinking about the nature of the fall, but, there you go.
Posts: 794 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Hopefully I come off as somewhat close to that, hehe.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
