Satanic beings are a major force of evil?

From

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University

MPhil  

Statement twenty: 

The statement was: Satanic beings are a major force of evil. There was much more skepticism concerning these beings within the Anglican camp in comparison to the Baptist group; however, the ministry of Jesus and his Apostles interacted with Satanic beings and there is no scriptural indication that these beings would not exist today. With the Anglicans, 62% agreed, 18% were not certain, 20% disagreed. With the Baptists, 92% agreed, 6% were not certain, and 2% disagreed.

Also from my MPhil

Edited

Some observers of Christianity like to think of Satan and his fallen angels as a metaphor for evil and wish to deny that these beings exist. Professor David Pailin, who was my advisor for a short time, criticized me for believing in these beings as there was no proof of their existence. I think that Scripture is historical and it certainly accepts their existence. As well, and this was a point that I made to Professor Pailin, if theists believe that God, who is spirit (John 4:24) created human beings who are of a physical nature, why is it more difficult to believe that God made angels who were of spiritual nature?

When I examine the Book of Job for example, I see in 1:8 God mentioning Job to Satan, it seems that God was desiring Satan to take action against Job. Indeed in 1:12, he allows Satan to destroy Job’s possessions, and later in 2:6 Satan was allowed to harm Job but not take his life. This story certainly seems to demonstrate God’s power over Satanic evil. God is sovereign over it and indirectly sanctions it.

Calvin also discussed in The Institutes the case of the Chaldeans attacking Job, that God, Satanic beings and human beings can all participate in the same evil acts:

How can we attribute the same work to God, to Satan, and to man, without either excusing Satan by the interference of God, or making God the author of the crime? This is easily done, if we look first to the end, and then to the mode of acting. The Lord designs to exercise the patience of his servant by adversity; Satan’s plan is to drive him to despair; while the Chaldeans are bent on making unlawful gain by plunder. Such diversity of purpose makes a wide distinction in the act. . . . We thus see that there is no inconsistency in attributing the same act to God, to Satan, and to man, while, from the difference in the end and mode of action, the spotless righteousness of God shines forth at the same time that the iniquity of Satan and of man is manifested in all its deformity. Calvin, (1539)(1998) Book II, Chapter 4, Section 2.

From

2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter 

Edited

A traditional approach to Biblical interpretation tends to lead to an acceptance of the existence of satanic beings. Erickson explains these beings are understood as Biblical, literal, and historical. Erickson (1994: 445-451). Roman Catholic scholar Peter Kreeft, working with Ronald K. Tacelli, states Satan is a deceiver of humanity, and this implies the assumption that Satan has personality. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 294).There is of course a debate between those of traditional conservative perspectives and those of liberal, progressive, mainline perspectives on the existence of satanic beings.

October 30, 2019 

A reasonable researched, exegesis and contextual review of the scripture, demonstrates that the biblical worldview is of actual, satanic beings that exist.

I noted in my PhD thesis, although less dogmatically for a secular university context than on this website:

Greek scholar, Walter Bauer (1979) in agreement with Strong, Strong (1890)(1986: 152), describes ‘Satan’ or ‘Satanas’ as the Adversary, enemy of God and those who belong to God. Bauer (1979: 744). Bauer goes on to note that Revelation, Chapter 2, verse 13, is describing Satan as persecuting the Church. Bauer (1979: 745). It appears by studying the Greek copies of the New Testament and assuming a type of contextual, literal hermeneutical method of examining Scripture, it is possible to view satanic beings as literal and historical beings…

BAUER, WALTER. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

CALVIN, JOHN (1553)(1952) Job, Translated by Leroy Nixon, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It?, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

KREEFT, PETER AND RONALD K. TACELLI (1994) Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

PAILIN, DAVID A. (1999) ‘Deism’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

PAILIN, DAVID A. (1999) ‘Enlightenment’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

PAILIN, DAVID A. (1999) ‘Process Theology’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Burlington, Welch Publishing Company.

Sufficient cause?

Sandy, Utah, May 2018

Reasons to Believe: Newsletter (2019), September/October, Reasons to Believe, Covina, California.

(Science and theology)

Another interesting and helpful newsletter article from Reasons to Believe. Can we escape the beginning? Excerpt from Escaping the Beginning? By Jeff Zweerink.

It is asked (paraphrased), did the universe began to exist, or did it always exist. (2). The universe has no conscious thought, no personality. (2). It exists but does not consciously provide life for what exists (paraphrased).

It is reasoned that the universe must have a sufficient cause. (2). The possibility of a physical sufficient cause is listed (2), as is the possibility of a nonphysical sufficient cause. (2).

Possibly 'something nonphysical, conscious and personal created the universe for a purpose.' (2).

The writer states that scientists have developed scientific tools that 'address this question.' (2). But these do not offer the 'certainty' that 'comes with the deductive arguments of philosophy or declarative statements of theology.' (2).

The article explains 'the models that best account for all the data are those where the universe began to exist.' (2).

Perhaps here, 'declarative statements' arise from biblical theology. Deductive arguments with premises and conclusions exist within the academic disciplines of philosophy, philosophy of religion, philosophical theology and systematic theology (as examples). I think deductive arguments could arise from biblical theology, but I can appreciate the intellectual distinction provided by the writer in this short article.

Arriving in Vancouver via Toronto, April 2018

First Cause (Philosophy of Religion &Theology) 

(My own work)

First cause is a major philosophical problem.

As matter (physical reality) is finite and cannot be its own cause as this would cause a vicious regress, it requires a cause beyond matter, including beyond time and space, which are also finite.

As example, one also cannot have a vicious regress of time or the present time would never be arrived. A vicious regress never solves its own problem...(logical or not).

Philosophical arguments for first cause do not prove the existence of the Biblical God but can serve as parallel truth to the creation story of Genesis 1. I use arguments for God being philosophically and theologically the first cause and this parallels the Genesis (1-3) creation account without being explicitly biblical. My biblical arguments, based on the ancient texts, are separate.

Deism or a related theism, in my mind is a far more likely alternative to Christianity than a non-theistic view, although I fully believe in the Biblical texts. Although Deism, and related theisms, do not accept a God that reveals self it still accepts the God of first cause. First cause provides premises which prove, philosophically and theologically, in a sense, the existence of God. God, as infinite, eternal and omnipotent, the deduced first and sufficient cause of all that is finite. God would also be conscious and within Judaism and Christianity, personal.

Eastern British Columbia tour, July-August, 2018

BLACKBURN, S. (1996) ‘Regress’, in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

BRADLEY, RAYMOND D. (1996) ‘Infinite Regress Argument’, in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Reasons to Believe: Newsletter (2019), September/October, Reasons to Believe, Covina, California.

2 Peter 3: 10 (Non-exhaustive)

From

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University

Statement nineteen: This statement is related. The earth will be perfected only when Christ returns. 

With Anglicans, 70% agreed, 12% were not certain, 18% disagreed. The Baptists were more emphatic as 88% agreed, 8% were not certain, and 4% disagreed.

MPhil 2003

October 21 2019 

In regard to the type of perfection meant in 2 Peter 3...

David F. Payne in his 2 Peter commentary opines that everything on the earth will be 'laid bare' (2 Peter 3: 10), is probably a more correct text than stating everything will be 'burned up'. (1569). This would lead to the theology of eschatological restoration as opposed to eschatological recreation.

There is indeed textual variance with 2 Peter 3: 10: (Non-exhaustive)

εὑρεθήσεται

Galaxie

Cited

A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 -- By: R. Larry Overstreet Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra Volume: BSAC 137:548 (Oct 1980) 

Article: A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 Author: R. Larry Overstreet BSac 137:548 (Oct 80) p. 354 A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 R. Larry Overstreet [R. Larry Overstreet, Professor of Homiletics, Grace Theological Seminary, Winona Lake, Indiana] 

Second Peter 3:10–13 presents two major problems to the interpreter. The first of these is determining the text in the conclusion of verse 10, that is, whether the text reads that the earth and its works “shall be burned up” or “shall be found.” 

The second problem is the actual interpretation of the passage. This study will examine each problem in order to seek to gain a solution that will be in harmony with the Word of God as a whole and in harmony with the immediate context of 2 Peter. The Textual Difficulty The Greek Text Interestingly, Robertson makes no definite decision on the textual problem here, but merely says that “the text is corrupt.”1 

At the conclusion of 2 Peter 3:10 the United Bible Societies’ Greek text gives the word εὑρεθήσεται, a future passive indicative of the verb εὑρίσκω, meaning, in general terms, “to find.” The verb has various shades of meaning, such as, “to find after seeking,” “to find without seeking,” or “to obtain.”2 However, for the present discussion the meaning “to find” is sufficient. The word in the text would thus be translated “shall be found.” Although some dissenting opinion can be found, most modern textual critics would regard this reading as having the strongest manuscript support.

Metzger comments that this reading is the “oldest reading, and the one which best explains the origin of the others that have been preserved….”3 BSac 137:548 (Oct 80) p. 355 

Several variant readings must be noticed and examined before a conclusion can be drawn regarding the text. One of these is a major variation involving the substitution of another word with a complete change of thought while the others are minor variations in comparison with the first.

The Variant Readings The major variation is the substitution of κατακαήσεται for εὑρεθήσεται. The translation would then read, “the earth and the works that are therein shall be burned up,” as κατακαίω means “to burn up.”4...
---

The footnotes are unfortunately numbered but not presented in this linked version...

If indeed, based on scholarship, the sufficient and stronger, manuscript evidence supports the new heaven and new earth being 'found' and 'obtained', this fits better with an interpretation of 'laid bare' than 'burned up'.

The new heaven and new earth are more likely restored versions of the old, than complete replacements of the old. Based on my reading, I reason that the new heaven and new earth of Isaiah 65-66. 2 Peter 3, Revelation 21-22, are more likely a restored, recapitulated universe and earth, than a completely ex nihilo, second creation.

Similarly to how those in Jesus Christ at the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15) will have new (enhanced) bodies made immortal from their original mortal bodies as did the resurrected Jesus Christ.

In other words, resurrected physical Jesus Christ, was the same physical Jesus Christ, in a sense, although enhanced for everlasting life.

Although resurrected persons have a spiritual body (1 Corinthians 15: 44), they still have physical qualities and live in a physical universe. As resurrected human beings in Christ still have a restored, physical nature and attributes, quite reasonably, the universe and earth should also have restored physical attributes. Perhaps a restored earth will be similar to the pre-fall Garden of Eden? Perhaps it will have more spiritual aspects than at present?

Theologically, this allows God to not have given up on his original creation via Genesis, but to have restored it.
---

A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 -- By: R. Larry Overstreet: Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra Volume: BSAC 137:548 (Oct 1980) Article: A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 Author: R. Larry Overstreet BSac 137:548 (Oct 80) p. 354 A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 R. Larry Overstreet [R. Larry Overstreet, Professor of Homiletics, Grace Theological Seminary, Winona Lake, Indiana]

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

BAUER, WALTER. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html

EDWARDS, PAUL AND ARTHUR PAP (1973)(eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know It? Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, in David Basinger and Randall Basinger (eds.), Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books. 

GRENZ, STANLEY J. DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.

HOCKING, DAVID (2014) The Book of Revelation, Tustin, California, HFT Publications.

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

OXFORD DICTIONARY OF SCIENCE (2010), Sixth Edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

PAYNE DAVID F.(1986) ‘2 Peter’, in F.F. Bruce, (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/Zondervan. 

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company. 

STACE, W.T. (1952)(1976) Religion and the Modern Mind, in John R. Burr and Milton Goldinger (eds.), Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, London, Collier Macmillan Publishers.

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Burlington, Welch Publishing Company.

THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (1993) Stuttgart, United Bible Societies. 

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

THE ORTHODOX STUDY BIBLE AND PSALMS (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

WENHAM, J.W. (1991) The Elements of New Testament Greek, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books.

 

A bad conscience leads to bad theology

Blacked out, power outage, bible study, last night...

Our church, bible study (home group) discussed 1 Timothy 1: 18-19, from last Sunday's sermon.

1 Timothy 1:18-19 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 18 This command I entrust to you, Timothy, my [a]son, in accordance with the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you fight the good fight, 19 keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to [b]their faith.

Footnotes: 1 Timothy 1:18 Or child 1 Timothy 1:19 Lit the

Bible Hub συνείδησιν 1 Timothy

Noun, accusative, feminine, singular

Bible Hub Strongs

4893 Strong's Concordance suneidésis: consciousness, spec. conscience Original Word: συνείδησις, εως, ἡ Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine Transliteration: suneidésis Phonetic Spelling: (soon-i'-day-sis) Definition: consciousness, conscience Usage: the conscience, a persisting notion.
---

In my agreement with my pastor and his sermon (paraphrased by my theology)...

A bad conscience leads to bad theology.

A significantly corrupted conscience, is not under submission to the Holy Spirit and therefore produces corrupted theology, which is also not in submission to the Holy Spirit, and is not biblically correct.

Verse 20 from the NASB, quote Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan, so that they will be taught not to blaspheme. These men are placed put of the Church, until they do not present blasphemous doctrines, which are not based on divinely inspired apostolic teachings.

They are excommunicated. Nute (1476).

John Calvin explains in the Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 13, Section 3:

Conscience, when it beholds God, must either have sure peace with his justice, or be beset by the terrors of hell.

A regenerated (Titus 1), justified (Romans) Christian conscience, under the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ, must either submit to God's justice, including doctrines, dogmas and theology, or else be beset by philosophies and theologies of hell. I am not stating that all in the Church that embrace key false doctrines are hellbound; the Apostle Paul, for example, does not indicate this in the 1 Timothy, example. But, I agree with John Calvin (paraphrased) that a scarred conscience, spirit and mind that embraces bad theology is facing the terrors of hell, even if just in this temporal life, in a filtered 'hellish' sense.

Allan G. Nute in his 1 Timothy commentary explains that when a consciousness of sin fails to repent in forgiveness, it creates a destructive faith, which the Apostle Paul calls blasphemous. (1476).

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book III, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College.

NUTE, ALAN G. (1986) in '1 Timothy', The International Bible Commentary, F.F. Bruce, General Editor, Grand Rapids, Zondervan/Marshall Pickering.

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.
---

Bonus

Burning a bridge is a way to prohibit potentially threatening premises and conclusions.

(Not usually my recommendation)