Christianity without Satan?

[Shrewd Manager]

The Canons and Decrees of The Ecumenical Councils are Infallible.

Fr. John Whiteford. Are Ecumenical Councils Infallible?

.

Solely for argument's sake let's say Justinian's Anathemas against Origen were actually ratified. What do they say about the universalism of Gregory of Nyssa, or of Gregory Nazianzus, or Theodore of Mopsuestia, among others? Very little, I would suggest, given they are expressly related to Origen, and Gregory Nissen is and remains canonised in both orthodox and Roman church traditions.

Something doesn't add up in your claim there brother.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Yes, just look around. Evil is everywhere and we have empirical confirmation in what people do. Even if there were no Devil, or Satan, or an angelic and malevolent Adversary, there would be plenty of people. No need to fear a shortage of evil or sin when you have plenty of people.

Good point.

btw, what happened when a few people came out of sin, came out of evil, turned to God, were immersed in Jesus' Name, and followed Jesus all as one ? (in ACTS)

Good Results ?

 

[Nige55]

Following Christianity without believing that satan/ the devil exists is like approving of judges without believing that crime exists. Sure, I understand that satan and evil can take many forms, a spirit of rebellion, lawlessness, Jezebel spirit, I don't think you can possibly counter the biblical examples and descriptions of the opposite of God. If you put evil down to mans sinful nature, then you fall into dangerous ground and fail to account for temptation, which Jesus himself was subject to (and rejected!).

Temptation can only come from the devil, as James 1:13 says - "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God, for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man"

I say no way, absolutely not possible to follow Christ and not believe that satan/ the devil exists.

 

[public hermit]

Temptation can only come from the devil, as James 1:13 says - "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God, for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man"

With all due respect, you are misrepresenting the force of that passage. Unless I'm mistaken, nowhere in that text does it mention that we are tempted by the devil. On the contrary, it states explicitly that temptation comes from within us, from our own desires.

"Blessed is anyone who endures temptation. Such a one has stood the test and will receive the crown of life that the Lord has promised to those who love him. No one, when tempted, should say, ‘I am being tempted by God’; for God cannot be tempted by evil and he himself tempts no one. But one is tempted by one’s own desire, being lured and enticed by it; then, when that desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin, and that sin, when it is fully grown, gives birth to death. Do not be deceived, my beloved."

I am sure you can find a different passage to support your position. Oddly enough, you picked one that speaks against it.

 

[RaymondG]

I say no way, absolutely not possible to follow Christ and not believe that satan/ the devil exists.

Which of the disciples were asked about or confirmed believe in a Satan, before Jesus told them to follow him. Is this something we have to assume so that our beliefs remain unfettered?

 

[aiki]

I believe in Satan/The Devil (but not as a red dude with horns etc.)

But many Christians don’t, even though he’s clearly in the bible

Usually liberal Christians, which is to say people professing belief in a God and a religion of their own making.

But can Christianity work (i.e. make sense) without the concept of The Devil?

I say it can’t

Light without darkness makes no sense

Does anyone here think Christianity can work without The Devil?

The devil isn't a concept but a fallen angelic being present in Scripture from Genesis to the Revelation of John. (Genesis 3; 1 Chronicles 21:1; Job 1:1-12; 2:1-6; Zechariah 3:1; Matthew 4:1-10; John 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:18...Revelations 12:9; 20:2)

Be careful of adopting a dualistic view of Christianity. God existed before all else as Truth, Light and Love. He did not need the devil, or darkness, or sin in order to do so.

I don't see that the devil is absolutely crucial to the Christian faith. He is certainly a factor in the Story of Redemption and is a primary Enemy of the believer, but I'm not convinced this makes him essential to Christianity.

 

[Jude1:3Contendforthefaith]

Solely for argument's sake let's say Justinian's Anathemas against Origen were actually ratified. What do they say about the universalism of Gregory of Nyssa, or of Gregory Nazianzus, or Theodore of Mopsuestia, among others? Very little, I would suggest, given they are expressly related to Origen, and Gregory Nissen is and remains canonised in both orthodox and Roman church traditions.

Something doesn't add up in your claim there brother.

Infallible.


.

 

[jahel]

Usually liberal Christians, which is to say people professing belief in a God and a religion of their own making.



The devil isn't a concept but a fallen angelic being present in Scripture from Genesis to the Revelation of John. (Genesis 3; 1 Chronicles 21:1; Job 1:1-12; 2:1-6; Zechariah 3:1; Matthew 4:1-10; John 13:27; Acts 5:3; 26:18...Revelations 12:9; 20:2)

Be careful of adopting a dualistic view of Christianity. God existed before all else as Truth, Light and Love. He did not need the devil, or darkness, or sin in order to do so.

I don't see that the devil is absolutely crucial to the Christian faith. He is certainly a factor in the Story of Redemption and is a primary Enemy of the believer, but I'm not convinced this makes him essential to Christianity.

I think he is essential as the black backdrop to see the light. One wouldn’t know covetness unless the law expressed the difference. Turning to God away from sins necessitates an awareness of what is not of God. It isn’t necessary to name it (what is not of God) (sins) as the devil, satan or law of the letter but recognition is indeed necessary.

 

[Bruce Leiter]

I believe in Satan/The Devil (but not as a red dude with horns etc.)

But many Christians don’t, even though he’s clearly in the bible

But can Christianity work (i.e. make sense) without the concept of The Devil?

I say it can’t

Light without darkness makes no sense

Does anyone here think Christianity can work without The Devil?

I say: Just because you don't like the idea of The Devil doesn't make it untrue!

Allow me to share a story:

Before I became Christian I attended a Unitarian chapel

I mentioned to the minister there that I believed in Satan

And he went and contacted my mother, telling her he was worried because I believed in Satan

How outrageous is that!

One good method of Bible interpretation is to believe what the Bible assumes, since it is God's Word. The Bible assumes that Satan exists. Therefore, he exists.

 

[aiki]

I think he is essential as the black backdrop to see the light. One wouldn’t know covetness unless the law expressed the difference. Turning to God away from sins necessitates an awareness of what is not of God. It isn’t necessary to name it (what is not of God) (sins) as the devil, satan or law of the letter but recognition is indeed necessary.

Well, what you're describing here is a kind of dualism found commonly in pagan religions. "God is light," the apostle John wrote, "and in Him is no darkness at all." (1 John 1:5) God existed in this way before there was physical darkness, or evil, or Satan. God did not need these things as an "essential backdrop" to his purity, holiness, and light. He is not counter-balanced, or highlighted, or juxtaposed against evil so that His holy perfection is recognized. God's perfection requires no contrast. To think that the devil is essential to the full expression of God's holy perfection is to misunderstand badly who God is.

One wouldn't know covetousness as a moral evil, if God had not said it was evil. But the pygmy in the jungles of New Guinea who has never heard of the Gospel or the Ten Commandments, knows perfectly well what covetousness is (though, he uses a different word for it). God's Moral Law, then, identifies covetousness as evil, but people know what covetous is without a Moral Law to tell them its bad.

Yes, it is necessary to know what sin is in order to turn away from it. But it is pagan dualism to think that there can only be righteousness if there is sin with which to contrast it. Again, God existed in timeless righteous perfection before there was a universe, and sin, and darkness, and the devil. Did God not know He was righteous until the devil and sin came into being? To say, "Yes," would be to deny His essential nature.

 

[jahel]

Well, what you're describing here is a kind of dualism found commonly in pagan religions. "God is light," the apostle John wrote, "and in Him is no darkness at all." (1 John 1:5) God existed in this way before there was physical darkness, or evil, or Satan. God did not need these things as an "essential backdrop" to his purity, holiness, and light. He is not counter-balanced, or highlighted, or juxtaposed against evil so that His holy perfection is recognized. God's perfection requires no contrast. To think that the devil is essential to the full expression of God's holy perfection is to misunderstand badly who God is.

One wouldn't know covetousness as a moral evil, if God had not said it was evil. But the pygmy in the jungles of New Guinea who has never heard of the Gospel or the Ten Commandments, knows perfectly well what covetousness is (though, he uses a different word for it). God's Moral Law, then, identifies covetousness as evil, but people know what covetous is without a Moral Law to tell them its bad.

Yes, it is necessary to know what sin is in order to turn away from it. But it is pagan dualism to think that there can only be righteousness if there is sin with which to contrast it. Again, God existed in timeless righteous perfection before there was a universe, and sin, and darkness, and the devil. Did God not know He was righteous until the devil and sin came into being? To say, "Yes," would be to deny His essential nature.

It’s not God that needs to see the difference, it’s people. His reasoning for no excuse though is that He is seen naturally so I think your right that the black backdrop is nonessential as far as God is concerned but He seems to accommodate lack of understanding with the application of nonessentials, such as law etc. or rather, he used to.

 

[Shrewd Manager]

Infallible.


.

Who - Justinian? He brought back Roman law and Roman power. Origen didn't suit the devil's schemes. The emperor's anathemas are infallible? So what does that say? Reason it out man.

 

[BobRyan]

I believe in Satan/The Devil (but not as a red dude with horns etc.)

But many Christians don’t, even though he’s clearly in the bible

But can Christianity work (i.e. make sense) without the concept of The Devil?

I say it can’t

Light without darkness makes no sense

Does anyone here think Christianity can work without The Devil?

I say: Just because you don't like the idea of The Devil doesn't make it untrue!

Allow me to share a story:

Before I became Christian I attended a Unitarian chapel

I mentioned to the minister there that I believed in Satan

And he went and contacted my mother, telling her he was worried because I believed in Satan

How outrageous is that!

You are correct - the devil is literal, real, a fallen angel so also the rest of his friends, fallen angels now called Satan and demons.

But before Satan fell into sin... there was no sin in heaven... and heaven worked just fine. Heaven did not "need" an angel to turn to be evil.

 

[BobRyan]

God didn't create Satan, man did. .

nonsense.

You think Jesus went out into the wilderness for 40 days to be tempted by a devil he made up right there on the spot because he was somehow defective in his thinking?

You think that Matt 4 is Jesus' imagination tempting him because he had defective thinking?

you think in Rev 12 heaven was at war "with its imagination" and then its "imagination" lost and was cast out?

again...nonsense.

Choose the Bible.

 

[hedrick]

I believe Karl Barth is right in this case: Karl Barth: Believing in Demons makes us Demonic. There is a negative force, represented in the Bible by demons and Satan. It's what I would call "suprapersonal evil," a kind of madness that can suck people and whole group in. But as negation, it's not really a person. Augustine saw that evil wasn't created by God, because it's not a thing. It has no power of its own, but is a corruption of good things. Barth points out that Satan can't be a fallen angel, because he is a murderer and liar from the beginning (John 8:44). Jesus seldom speaks of it, and only in rejection. (Indeed Luke 10:18 suggests its destruction.) I recall Barth once saying (and I haven't found a source for this, so my memory may be wrong), we don't believe in Satan; we believe against it. To give it reality and study it, even as an enemy, is dangerous. But still, there's no question that suprapersonal evil is a real danger, even if in some sense it doesn't exist.

 

[jahel]

“When a person becomes consumed by his or her enemy, they become a twisted disciple of their nemesis.” Yes, that’s why keeping eyes set on Jesus is imperative. Turn to God away from idols. Put no confidence in the flesh etc.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

“When a person becomes consumed by his or her enemy, they become a twisted disciple of their nemesis.” Yes, that’s why keeping eyes set on Jesus is imperative. Turn to God away from idols. Put no confidence in the flesh etc.

What if they just ignore the enemy, and he takes over their house ? (body, mind, soul)

 

[jahel]

What if they just ignore the enemy, and he takes over their house ? (body, mind, soul)

If you have your mind on Jesus Christ in the horizontal part of your life you needn’t worry because Jesus Christ will take care of the vertical in heaven.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

If you have your mind on Jesus Christ in the horizontal part of your life you needn’t worry because Jesus Christ will take care of the vertical in heaven.

If you have those things right, as you post, then you don't ignore hasatan, the enemy.

You overcome him, and destroy his work (in others) as God says.

 

[jahel]

If you have those things right, as you post, then you don't ignore hasatan, the enemy.

You overcome him, and destroy his work (in others) as God says.

I certainly don’t think knowing Jesus means being ignorant of one who as a roaring lion has the right to sift faith constantly. But rather see the difference between hope and no hope.

"thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope".