How/why is Christianity a monotheism?

[Vector]

Yet, it is the Christian interpretation that while we all excericse free will, as the angels as God's creation must by their very definition also exercise (yet they serve God), we are furthering God's agenda, if you will. i.e. Devil's temptations make our faith stronger, etc.

And if all actions of free will are really serving the purpose of God, then the argument could be carried back to the Greek Gods, are they exercising their free will - or are they also instuments of a higher God ?

[Lord Mhoram]

Vector,

Yet, if Satan is doing but God's will, then why is it said that he rebelled against God ? And why did God cast him from heaven to punish him ?

Truthfully, I cannot answer this question. What I've been doing is using Christian theology to answer questions, and this one has no answer because there are too many holes.

And if all actions of free will are really serving the purpose of God, then the argument could be carried back to the Greek Gods, are they exercising their free will - or are they also instuments of a higher God ?

Are you asking if the Greek gods are serving the free will of the Judeo-Christian God? I don't think I understand the question.

[Fist and Faith]

The only definition of "god" I've ever been able to come up with that's at all comfortable is: Something that is worshipped. (I suppose a definition of "worship" is now in order, but I don't have one.) All of the Greek gods were worshipped.

Perhaps Christianity is a monotheism because the Christian God is the only thing/being worshipped by Christians. Of course, some think not, because of the Trinity, although it is not usually Christians who think this. Heh. Also, some will say the saints, and particularly Mary, are worshipped. But I'd say they are only being asked to "speak to God for me, would you please?".

[Vector]

And if all actions of free will are really serving the purpose of God, then the argument could be carried back to the Greek Gods, are they exercising their free will - or are they also instuments of a higher God ?

Are you asking if the Greek gods are serving the free will of the Judeo-Christian God? I don't think I understand the question.

No, admittedly this is referencing an early post which compared the Greek Gods to Angels in terminology (since they were created) - though not subservient to a Judeo-Christian god, just a higher god (which may be the same as the Judeo-Christian god).

But you already responded "Saying because they are created by God and therefore not demi-gods is a pretty simplistic interpretation, I admit. There is more to it.", so really the point I am making is no longer relevant.

[Avatar]

God is existence and God is good. Therefore, Satan cannot be an aspect of God.

And then...

[God is existence. Everything exists in God.

By his very definition, everything Satan does is God's will..

Sorry man, I couldn't let that pass.

I agree with the second bit though, that if he exists, he does god's will. This is where I like the Islamic appraoch to evil. IIRC, they say "yes! Everything bad that happens to you is the will of god, so you better be good!"

Of course, I think the Judaic appraoch is more accurate myself, but that's neither here nore there.

BTW, I though Angels didn't have free will? Humans only.

(And I'd really like somebody to get back to me on verifying the whole Fall story. Seems to me there is more mythology and canon than scripture in it.)

--Avatar

[Iryssa]

Perhaps Christianity is a monotheism because the Christian God is the only thing/being worshipped by Christians. Of course, some think not, because of the Trinity, although it is not usually Christians who think this. Heh. Also, some will say the saints, and particularly Mary, are worshipped. But I'd say they are only being asked to "speak to God for me, would you please?".

You hit the nail on the head, Fist. I would add that some people DO worship Mary and/or the saints, but that this goes against Christian doctrine.

Avatar, on the topic of the fall of Satan...I don't think there's actually much in the scriptures about it. You're right, a lot of it is just mythology and dogma. Many people believe that Isaiah 14:12-15 is the story of how Satan fell from heaven. However, I believe that the context shows otherwise...

[Avatar]

Thanks Iryssa. As you say, taken out of context it seems fairly clear, and could well be the basis of the story of the Fall. But in context, it seems clear that it refers to some king who thought he was mighty.

Interesting though, I've heard Lucifer referred to as the Morning Star, and also been informed that that was actually a title of christ. I'd say that the "name" comes from that verse though.

Certainly we know from Job that Satan was a "child" of god, (but then it also implies that god didn't know what Satan had been up to. He had to ask him.

So, essentially, it seems that the whole "origin of satan" thing is something thought up by people, and that the majority of the tale comes from Milton's Paradise Lost.

If anybody has some other verses suggesting otherwise, I'd be interested to see them. And isn't it time you got some sleep Iryssa?

--Avatar

[Fist and Faith]

Here's a couple sites about the fall of Satan:
www.deliriumsrealm.com/delirium/mythology/satan.asp
users.aristotle.net/~bhuie/satan.htm
I have to go to work right now, so I can't read them too carefully and see how good they are. Let me know.

[Avatar]

Hmm, interesting, although I'm about to leave work, so I can't dedicate as much time to them as I'd like to right now.

First one is most interesting, seems to indicate that the only scriptural mentions of the actual "fall" come from the apocryphal books. (And at that, seem based on the verse from Isaiah that Iryssa linked to, apparently directed at a King of Babylon, and an incredibly similar verse from Ezekial, addressed to the King of Tyre.) As she mentions, they have been interpreted as referring to satan.

Much I already knew, such as Satan being a servant of God in the OT, and only later asuming this role as the principal cause of evil etc.

I suppose that much depends on your view of the bible: Literal word of god or interpreted allegory carrying a message, and not much else.

Thanks for the links though, will definitley check over them again when I have the chance.

--Avatar

[Iryssa]

So, essentially, it seems that the whole "origin of satan" thing is something thought up by people, and that the majority of the tale comes from Milton's Paradise Lost.

...And isn't it time you got some sleep Iryssa?

*grin* I went to sleep not too long after that!

You know...I haven't actually read Paradise Lost yet...My boyfriend's doing his directed study on it this summer, though, so I think I'll have to in order to keep up with him

Thanks for the links, Fist! I've gt some errands to run right now, so I can't get to them immediately, either, but I'll for sure check them out later, too!

[Lord Mhoram]

Avatar,

What is the problem with those two statements that I made?

[[Syl]]

Interesting though, I've heard Lucifer referred to as the Morning Star, and also been informed that that was actually a title of christ. I'd say that the "name" comes from that verse though.

www.answers.com/topic/pha-ton
www.answers.com/main/ntquery;jsessionid ... sbid=lc04b

[Vector]

Some interesting reading:

users.aristotle.net/~bhuie/satan.htm

I looked at a number of different articles, and this one seemed the clearest - though certainly there are othe contradictory articles to read.

To some degree, I think this debunks the belief that Milton originated the concept of the fall of satan and the rebellion.

Even if this interpretation of the scriptures is wrong, it at least shows that this was a potential interpretation by Milton and those before him.

[Avatar]

Great links Syl, thanks.

It is noteworthy that the Old Testament itself does not at any point actually mention the rebellion and fall of Satan directly. This non-Scriptural belief assembled from interpretations of different passages, would fall under the heading Christian mythology, except that the very idea of a Christian mythology is widely attacked as offensive.

Lord Mhoram-- Was just noting the apparent contradiction of the statements in two different posts. In the first, you say that satan cannot possibly be an aspect of god, in the second, that satan must be carrying out gods will. (If he is obedient to the will of god, then he must be an aspect of god?)

Perhaps I misinterpreted your intent, but it struck me as amusing irony.

--Avatar

[Plissken]

The Book of Job is enlightening on the subject of Satan and his relationship with God - Satan kind of wanders into heaven and chats with God, and God asks what he's been up to. Satan replies that he's just been wandering around...

After some light conversation, during which it's easy to imagine that a few drinks were served, God and Satan enter into a friendly bet over the soul of one man - Satan thinks that if he tortures Job enough, Job will leave his faith behind. God gives him good odds, and we're off to the races!

Seriously, if you interpret the tale as poetry designed to explain human suffering, it's pretty clear that God and Satan are two sides of the same coin.

On the other hand, if you take a more Fundamentalist approach, the larger questions we've been discussing come into play and things get pretty confusing pretty damned fast.

On a sidenote: I believe there are some passages in Psalms that have been interpreted as describing the Fall of the Morningstar. Of course, I think that they are more likely about Absolom, but I always like to keep things simple and pretty.

[Avatar]

The way I've usually seen it is that it is god who thinks that no matter how much satan makes Job suffer, he will still not change his mind.

First, he holds up Job as an example of perfection, then satan says, "Of course he's worshipful and perfect, what evil have you ever allowed to come to him?" Then god says, "Well, take all his possessions away, and see if he still loves me..." etc.

Poor old Job. If it had been some human overlord, the Human rights commission or somebody would have been all over him.

--Avatar

[Cybrweez]

Poor old Job. If it had been some human overlord, the Human rights commission or somebody would have been all over him.

--Avatar

I guess that's the thing w/God, there's no such thing as "human rights". Its something we make up.

[Gadget nee Jemcheeta]

*bites tongue*


But aaanyway, I remember covering some of this in a class I took, Caesar and Christ... pretty interesting stuff. I don't know if we brought up good ol'e Constantine and Plato into this yet, but here's a sight for ya. Pardon the Bias.

www.sullivan-county.com/identity/trinity.htm

[Worm of Despite]

Most interesting web site! Enjoyed the quotes!

[Edge]

Lord Mhoram-- Was just noting the apparent contradiction of the statements in two different posts. In the first, you say that satan cannot possibly be an aspect of god, in the second, that satan must be carrying out gods will. (If he is obedient to the will of god, then he must be an aspect of god?)

Perhaps I misinterpreted your intent, but it struck me as amusing irony.

--Avatar

Um, I don't get it. How does someone doing your will make them an aspect of yourself? Is the private merely an aspect of the sergeant? Is the secretary merely an aspect of the boss? Is Blair merely an aspect of Bush?

*ducks & runs*