If God is omnipotent, why can't He smite the devil?

[Marz Blak]

humans have free will .

OK. You convinced me.

 

[funyun]

Did man invent God?

Yes.

 

[funyun]

God can and will smite the devil. He simply chooses not to prior to His own intended time.

.....

I could step on that ant that bit me, but I won't cuz his time's not up yet.

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

Satan doesn't seem angry to me in Job. He's just being the Devil's Advocate to God, so to speak. God says Job is good, Satan says that Job's only good because things are going good for him. God then let's Satan afflict Job (The LORD said to Satan, "Very Well, he is in your power; only spare his life." Job 2.6). If God had told Satan not to do this would Satan have been able to do anything to Job? Also note how Satan never kills Job, Satan is following God's commands. Satan doesn't seem angry or rebellious to me. He's just pointing out something to God (much like Abraham did when God wanted to destroy Soddom and Gomorrah. Was Abraham angry at God there?), and then he does as God commands him.

Satan doesn't have a choice about following God's commands. If anyone is going to be complete toast on Judgment Day, it's him. If you'd like to learn more about his rebellion, please read about the fall of man in Genesis and what transpired concerning the devil. And Jesus's description of his falling from heaven plus references concerning his wiles. If you'd like, I can get you a list and I'd be pleased to do so if you find it a useful resource.

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

That is, Yahweh has created humans as some big experiment to prove something to satan. Using people as a means to this end is just immoral.

Can you provide a basis for this overall assessment, including authoritative resource (I.e. scripture)?

I have yet to hear a rationale argument that makes any sense of why Yahweh has no problem executing all kinds of humans but won't even tie the hands of satan.

God still has a purpose for satan. All creation was made for God's purposes, as it is written:

Proverbs 16

16:2All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes; but the LORD weigheth the spirits.

Likewise,

Isaiah 55
55:8For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

55:9For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

55:10For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not thither, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:

55:11So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

Folks are coming up with whatever explanations they can to justify their belief in the devil and their belief in the old testement. Don't any of you christians find this paradoxical?

How does it require justification? By what divine authority do you make this determination? Moreover, I don't think it is paradoxical; I think you're using human reasoning to explain divine purposes which no one can know without seeing what the Lord has to say about it in His word.

 

[BobKat]

It seems to me that rather than be the loving father he is supposed to be, God would let his children fall into the hands of the"Devil" instead of rescueing them from the most sadistic ending any human could imagine...the eternal lake of fire. What kind of loving God would devise such a place for his beloved children? I do not need the fear of hell to encourage me to live an honorable life.
BobKat

 

[TheOriginalWhitehorse]

You're not alone in wondering this. A lot of people do; it's a valley we all have to walk through on our journey of our Christian faith. The question that answers it for me is, Is it truly that God doesn't love us, or is it human beings who do not love God?

In answering this, we discover that God made us (in Adam) perfect, but we rebelled. God gave us a way out. He took the beatings on His back and undeservedly suffered the death for us because He didn't want us to go through torment. But that leaves the ball in our park. What do we do with this salvation?

Your question is very understandable.

 

[MATRILEB]

It seems to me that rather than be the loving father he is supposed to be, God would let his children fall into the hands of the"Devil" instead of rescueing them from the most sadistic ending any human could imagine...the eternal lake of fire. What kind of loving God would devise such a place for his beloved children? I do not need the fear of hell to encourage me to live an honorable life.
BobKat

God is such a great father that he allows his children to decide if they want to retire to his kingdom and live with him, or live apart from him. God's kingdom is, of course, a bastion of tranquility and bliss. The same might not be true for that "other place." Depends who's in charge over there.

Not that I subscribe to that view. I believe that everyone is ultimately destined to return to God because the ostensible distinction of identity between God and a person is illusory...

 

[Bob Moore]

I believe that everyone is ultimately destined to return to God because the ostensible distinction of identity between God and a person is illusory...

Would you mind telling me how you reached that conclusion in view of the fact that the certainty of Hell for many is expressly taught in scripture?

 

[MATRILEB]

I prefer to interpret the teachings of the Bible (Old and New Testaments) in their proper context, as Eastern religions. I reject Gentile interpretations.

There is an erroneous belief among Westerners that Eastern philosophy and Christianity are irreconciliable, but this is not the case. Eastern philosophy attempts to ascertain the relationship between man, God, nature, and reality, but it does not advocate a religious creed. The religion of Christianity itself does little to elucidate the exact nature of the relationship between the aforementioned, which is where the philosophical writings of Christian philosophers come in to fill that role.

I believe that Eastern philosophy, which, in my opinion, represents the acme of human philosophical inquiry, is completely compatible with the Christian religion, and given that Christianity is an Eastern religion influenced by Eastern ideas, Eastern philosophy is a better foundation for Christian doctrine than Gentile ideas are.

Just my opinion though...

 

[Bob Moore]

I prefer to interpret the teachings of the Bible (Old and New Testaments) in their proper context, as Eastern religions. I reject Gentile interpretations.

So you consider Judaism to be an Eastern Religion?

By 'I reject Gentile interpretations' do you mean any interpretation, at any level of scholarship, by any person not a Jew? Or are you speaking of some of the truly wierd interpretations certain folks like to post around here?

There is an erroneous belief among Westerners that Eastern philosophy and Christianity are irreconciliable, but this is not the case.

I strongly disagree.

Eastern philosophy attempts to ascertain the relationship between man, God, nature, and reality, but it does not advocate a religious creed.

And that is why I disagree. The truth claims of Christianity are specific and exclusive. It is objective rather than subjective. Therefore, if one holds only non-specific ideas (i.e. creedless) there can be no genuine profession of Christianity because there can be no understanding of what Christianity is.

The religion of Christianity itself does little to elucidate the exact nature of the relationship between the aforementioned, which is where the philosophical writings of Christian philosophers come in to fill that role.

Christianity elucidates the relationship between man and God, and in a very real sense between man, God, and reality. Nature is described as being under the curse because of us, and our relationship to it is quite nicely described way back in Genesis. What else do you need to know?

I believe that Eastern philosophy, which, in my opinion, represents the acme of human philosophical inquiry, is completely compatible with the Christian religion, and given that Christianity is an Eastern religion influenced by Eastern ideas, Eastern philosophy is a better foundation for Christian doctrine than Gentile ideas are.

Just my opinion though...

That is interesting. Your avatar indicates only 'other religion'. Would you care to be more specific? Your uses of the term "Gentile" have got me wondering. Typically the word is used by Jews, but there are a few others who employ it.

 

[Lucubratus]

Would you mind telling me how you reached that conclusion in view of the fact that the certainty of Hell for many is expressly taught in scripture?

Hi Bob,

I'm not going to state this as any sort of argument - just wanted to toss in a comment -- some people I know and some Pastors I've listened to, all have two different interpretations about Hell. One being the literal where everyone involved is tormented for eternity, etc.
The other one of them being that it would be Satan and his minions (the fallen angels) that would be cast into hell "eternally" while the humans who reject god would just "disappear". I don't remember which religion that was - but it implied that there would be a lake of fire but the spirit would be consumed and that was it for the human spirit. Just "nothing". I just heard that one about two years ago after always thinking Hell was as the first interpretation.

 

[Bob Moore]

Hi Bob,

I'm not going to state this as any sort of argument - just wanted to toss in a comment -- some people I know and some Pastors I've listened to, all have two different interpretations about Hell. One being the literal where everyone involved is tormented for eternity, etc.
The other one of them being that it would be Satan and his minions (the fallen angels) that would be cast into hell "eternally" while the humans who reject god would just "disappear". I don't remember which religion that was - but it implied that there would be a lake of fire but the spirit would be consumed and that was it for the human spirit. Just "nothing". I just heard that one about two years ago after always thinking Hell was as the first interpretation.

Hi Lucubratus,

Yes, I have heard some people try to put that kind of spin on it, but the idea of dissapearance or annihilation not only can't be supported from scripture, but is flatly contradicted by it.

Albert Barnes puts it this way: "The wicked will be destroyed, in what may be properly called the “second” death. This does not mean that this death will in all respects resemble the first death, but there will be so many points of resemblance that it will be proper to call it “death.” It does not mean that they will be “annihilated,” for “death” never implies that. The meaning is, that this will be a cutting off from what is properly called “life,” from hope, from happiness, and from peace, and a subjection to pain and agony, which it will be proper to call “death” - death in the most fearful form; death that will continue for ever. No statements in the Bible are more clear than those which are made on this point; no affirmation of the eternal punishment of the wicked “could be” more explicit than those which occur in the sacred Scriptures."

Matthew 25:46 also plainly says "everlasting punishment", and 2 Thessalonians 1:9 repeats it: "Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power."

I suppose that the very idea of such horrific punishment compels some people to deny even the possibility. Further, there are a great many who consider God only from the aspect of His love. They neglect the other side of the coin which is Divine judgment. The God who is preached in many churches doesn't look much like the God of the Bible because sound doctrine and preaching are not socially popular. Paul was right when he told Timothy, "For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;...." I am convinced that this sort of 'preaching' only passes because the hearers either hope it is that way, or are Biblically lazy and do not know what the Book actually says on the subject.

 

[ElohaySelichot]

Men Chose and even still DO choose to go against God, and do as they please, daily living in a lifestyle not pleasing to God, but rather to Satan. it's our Choice. if Jehovah were not to "let us fall into the hands" of satan then we would not have a free will. in the end... after we have all made our decisions as to who we side with. Satan will be bound for 1000 years in the bottomless pit... and after which he will give it one more attempt- a final rebellion against Elohim and His... he will fail and be destroyed by the almighty.

why go through all this in the first place? well, think about it-those of us who chose Him, will be with him because we want to out of our free will. and which is better? man created? or created man Glorified? "and we will be just as He is..."

satan's a pawn, not a king, in this huge plan that is incredible see...whether he wants to think so or not.

 

[transientlife]

Might the concept of the devil be a representation of the power of free will - and the personification of malignant free will?
Personally, I don't think God is cruel, perhaps all a matter of perception? I prefer the idea that all things happen for a reason and sometimes what happens is incomprehensible to us humans. I also apply the idea of God in an eastern and native american sense where God is in everything, animals, earth, air, you get the idea.

 

[MATRILEB]

So you consider Judaism to be an Eastern Religion?

By 'I reject Gentile interpretations' do you mean any interpretation, at any level of scholarship, by any person not a Jew? Or are you speaking of some of the truly wierd interpretations certain folks like to post around here?

I reject interpretations that stem from a Western European worldview because it is often at odds with the Eastern philosophical principles that influenced Jesus and the Biblical authors. I don't dismiss them out-of-hand, of course, I examine them first and see if they have merit.

And that is why I disagree. The truth claims of Christianity are specific and exclusive. It is objective rather than subjective.

Examples?

Christianity elucidates the relationship between man and God, and in a very real sense between man, God, and reality. Nature is described as being under the curse because of us, and our relationship to it is quite nicely described way back in Genesis. What else do you need to know?

I would like to know in detail how man is related to God. Of what substance is God composed? And man? Is it the same substance? Is it different? Where did God get the material to create the universe? Did He use preexisting material or did He create it? How did He create the Earth? How did He create life? Genesis says He performed these amazing feats but does not explain exactly how He did it. What powers did He use? What mechanisms or principles did He utilize?

As you can see, Genesis offers very little.

That is interesting. Your avatar indicates only 'other religion'. Would you care to be more specific? Your uses of the term "Gentile" have got me wondering. Typically the word is used by Jews, but there are a few others who employ it.

I consider myself as simply a Christian, but obviously not a typical one. I believe in Christ and to a degree in Christianity, but my philosophical base is Eastern philosophy.

 

[transientlife]

I reject interpretations that stem from a Western European worldview because it is often at odds with the Eastern philosophical principles that influenced Jesus and the Biblical authors. I don't dismiss them out-of-hand, of course, I examine them first and see if they have merit.

I consider myself as simply a Christian, but obviously not a typical one. I believe in Christ and to a degree in Christianity, but my philosophical base is Eastern philosophy.

I agree here. [In my experience] many Christians judge the Eastern religions before even examining them, just because they are different. (I consider myself simply a Christian, denominationless) I have read the Tao Te Ching and the Dhammapada, and both Eastern texts (in addition to the bible, of course) greatly influence my life. I find great solace in the Tao and Buddhist ideals of the flow and impermanence, and just living and trying to attain and maintain peace within and without yourself.

 

[Bob Moore]

And that is why I disagree. The truth claims of Christianity are specific and exclusive. It is objective rather than subjective.

Examples?

John 5:21-29, 14:6, 6:65, 4:22. There are dozens, if not hundreds of others.

I would like to know in detail how man is related to God.

Wouldn't we all? We have all the detail we need, which is not necessairily all the detail we desire.

Of what substance is God composed?

Of no substance. God is a spirit. John 4:24.

And man?

Of the dust of the ground. Genesis 2:7.

Where did God get the material to create the universe? Did He use preexisting material or did He create it? How did He create the Earth? How did He create life? Genesis says He performed these amazing feats but does not explain exactly how He did it. What powers did He use? What mechanisms or principles did He utilize?

These are all interesting questions, and worthy of inquiry. But the Bible deals with the relationship between God and His creation (us). The details of how He created are not relevant. Or do you consider yourself outside the scope of Daniel 4:35?

As you can see, Genesis offers very little.

Genesis tells us far more about ourselves and about God then most want to know.

I consider myself as simply a Christian, but obviously not a typical one. I believe in Christ and to a degree in Christianity, but my philosophical base is Eastern philosophy.

There are neither types nor degrees of Christian. One either IS or IS NOT. There is no middle ground. Do you subscribe to this:

Romans 10:9, "...because if thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved:" ?

 

[Lucubratus]

I'm in the same kind of boat as it were about Transient life; though I degree with you Bob about there are no 'degrees or types' of Christians. I just make it simple and say non-denominational IF I ever do go to a church, or just say personal relationship with God. I read the Bible, can't say I always figure out what it is I am reading...lol..but then I also think there's some things GOd doesn't want me privy to understanding yet. All in good time; but a lot of philosophy of varied cultures I relate to. I'm just not one that equates philosophy with religion and of those I have studied or read up on, when it comes down to bare bones - most of what I have read is actually similar to the Bible passages. it's just worded differently and I don't view it as "unChristian" because if a philosophist is saying something along the lines of taking care of yourself and your environment, the bible says the same thing pretty much. That's basically what I equate as common sense living (which I think is also in the bible)
I don't live by any philosophy or go around quoting Tao or Buddhism or anything, I just read it and think "well that's cool" and I'd dare to say I could find correlation to said philosophy in the Bible.

The thing about Hell - I see your viewpoint, but there's been other people who have the opposite viewpoint who are just as convinced as you are - and use bible passages to confirm it. It sure can get confusing....lol.

You know, all those questions about what IS GOd and did he make up the universe or draw from existing materials - that was stuff I never really pondered when I get to his paradise. I figure he either will tell the curious ones or we'll already know when we get there, or we dont know because its none of our business. ;-) But the one question that hit me suddenly in my early 20's I asked my Mom about and she just gave me the most bizarre look. I know it's silly - but here it is...

When Jesus walked on the water, did he get his feet wet?

Mom said she didn't think he did, but then I figured his must have been wet since didn't his feet get dirt (from the soil) on them?

 

[Bob Moore]

I'm in the same kind of boat as it were about Transient life; though I degree with you Bob about there are no 'degrees or types' of Christians.

I think I should have been more specific. While it is true that either you belong to Christ or you don't, there certainly are degrees of Christian maturity. There are some who say that being filled with the Spirit is a separate operation that may or may not ever happen, but that is not what the scriptures teach.

...I read the Bible, can't say I always figure out what it is I am reading...lol..but then I also think there's some things GOd doesn't want me privy to understanding yet.

It takes a fair degree of maturity to understand that.

All in good time; but a lot of philosophy of varied cultures I relate to. I'm just not one that equates philosophy with religion and of those I have studied or read up on, when it comes down to bare bones - most of what I have read is actually similar to the Bible passages. it's just worded differently and I don't view it as "unChristian" because if a philosophist is saying something along the lines of taking care of yourself and your environment, the bible says the same thing pretty much. That's basically what I equate as common sense living (which I think is also in the bible)
I don't live by any philosophy or go around quoting Tao or Buddhism or anything, I just read it and think "well that's cool" and I'd dare to say I could find correlation to said philosophy in the Bible.

Yes, you could.

The thing about Hell - I see your viewpoint, but there's been other people who have the opposite viewpoint who are just as convinced as you are - and use bible passages to confirm it. It sure can get confusing....lol.

Right. But the modern ideas concerning hell are just that. Yes, there have been through church history a few who taught annihilation, but they were always refuted. So it is In the church today. I have many times dealt with this subject, and the main thing I like to point out is that for any passage of Scripture there is one, and only one, correct interpretation, even though there may be a thousand different applications. Having said that I will also point out that one of the most basic principles of interpretation is that 'Scripture interprets Scripture'. That is to say that if any given passage seems to be saying a certain thing, then go to other passages that are more clear. It is by not going to the clear passages that some people come up with the idea that hell ain't so bad after all.

You know, all those questions about what IS GOd and did he make up the universe or draw from existing materials - that was stuff I never really pondered when I get to his paradise. I figure he either will tell the curious ones or we'll already know when we get there, or we dont know because its none of our business. ;-)

I like that attitude.

But the one question that hit me suddenly in my early 20's I asked my Mom about and she just gave me the most bizarre look. I know it's silly - but here it is...

When Jesus walked on the water, did he get his feet wet? Mom said she didn't think he did, but then I figured his must have been wet since didn't his feet get dirt (from the soil) on them?

I never thought about it, but the answer is probably yes for the reason you gave.