Forbidden Knowledge (Already Widely Disseminated)

[RevDisk]

[snip]
it doesn't make sense to me that an angel of some special position would be so poorly designed by a perfect creator as to spontaneously become evil in a matter of a few days.

You don't work with programmers or engineers, do you?

[roo_ster]

You don't work with programmers or engineers, do you?

Heh.

[cordex]

You don't work with programmers or engineers, do you?

There is a difference between beings exposed to evil and changed and/or formed with latent evil and a being who spontaneously creates evil which is often the claim made about Satan.

Even so, I'm sure there exist theories that Satan is actually a good creature obediently playing an assigned evil role (as with programmers) or was created with the purpose of being evil from the beginning (as with engineers).

[Ron]

There is a difference between beings exposed to evil and changed and/or formed with latent evil and a being who spontaneously creates evil which is often the claim made about Satan.

Even so, I'm sure there exist theories that Satan is actually a good creature obediently playing an assigned evil role (as with programmers) or was created with the purpose of being evil from the beginning (as with engineers).

Those theories are deterministic.

While I don't have a very elaborate belief system regarding the devil, I do believe he has/had free will. Freedom to choose one course of action over another.  

At the scale we exist or can observe there does seem to be some randomness and what appears to be chaos built into reality. For beings with free will to exist I think that would be a necessity.

[Balog]

Just for my own clarification, do you ascribe to both the young earth theory and that the creation happened in six literal days?  I don't believe either one, but it helps to discuss things using the same assumptions.True, as with most religious tradition.I suppose that is just presumption on my part.  Assuming for a moment that a variety of things are true (that the Bible contains an accurate description of creation, that said creation happened in 144 hours, that Lucifer was created at some point in that time period, that he went rogue at some point prior to playing snake in Eden), it doesn't make sense to me that an angel of some special position would be so poorly designed by a perfect creator as to spontaneously become evil in a matter of a few days.

The general thought is that spiritual beings inhabit a realm outside of temporal space time as we understand it, and thus order of creation is not nearly as important. The old analogy of time as a river etc.

I'm curious as to what you do believe about creation.

[cordex]

Those theories are deterministic.

Just to be clear, I do not support those theories except as they apply to programmers and engineers.

The general thought is that spiritual beings inhabit a realm outside of temporal space time as we understand it, and thus order of creation is not nearly as important. The old analogy of time as a river etc.

That's pretty close to the way I learned it growing up, but as fistful points out, much of that is speculation and extrapolation.

I'm curious as to what you do believe about creation.

Mostly I believe that there is an incredible amount that I can not even pretend to know.  I believe that observations about the universe and our earth indicate that creation happened much longer than 6,000 years ago and I don't believe that those observations are part of a clever ruse designed by a trickster deity.

[fifth_column]

<<snip>> a being who spontaneously creates evil <<snip>>

Perfect description of my first wife!  Except she was much more malicious than anything ascribed to satan . . .

[Perd Hapley]

I don't believe that those observations are part of a clever ruse designed by a trickster deity.

I don't, either. It is generally supposed (kind of an assumption everyone seems to make) that Adam and Eve were adults at their creation. The narrative doesn't say, but it is the nearly universal interpretation of the story. When they were only a day old, they appeared to be, say, 18 or 30, or whatever the case may have been. I think the same is probably true for the universe. It was created as a fully-developed, expanding universe, and this may mean it looks billions of years old, to us, even if it is but several thousand years old. Not because He was trying to fool anyone, but maybe that is just the only way to make a suitable universe. I may be wrong about that, and I'd like to look into that a little more in the future. (Yes, to be abundantly clear, I'm down with the 6, 24-hour days, and a universe that is several thousand years old.)

...it doesn't make sense to me that an angel of some special position would be so poorly designed by a perfect creator as to spontaneously become evil in a matter of a few days.

I had never considered the possibility that Satan's tendency to evil was the fault of poor design. Rather the reverse.

I think there's a reason why the angels fell first, and then the humans. Both races fell, not because God messed up, but because He created us to be so like Him (i.e., with the power to think, to judge, to create, to imagine), that we imagined our own judgement was as good as His. The animals (so far as I know) aren't considered morally fallen, perhaps because they don't have the same God-image with which we humans were made. It's beyond them to even consider whether they know better than God, or to ponder some moral code. They simply do what they do.

But we (and I think, the angels) have enough of God's image to make the mistake of thinking we can do without God, or that we can know better than God. It is my (admittedly unorthodox) point of view that the angels that were going to fall, fell almost immediately, because as spiritual beings they could see God as He is. They knew almost immediately whether they would love or hate Him. We humans, being physical, don't see God so clearly (through a glass darkly, as St. Paul says). It takes us longer to make up our minds. I think that also explains why we don't worry about any more of the angels falling, and why the Bible says nothing about redemption for the fallen angels. Due to their more immediate knowledge of God, their minds are very firmly made up, and always have been. I think that also explains why humans who waver between sinfulness and holiness on Earth, will be strictly one or the other in eternity. When we see God the way the angels see him (without the mediation of the physical world), we will once for all make up our minds firmly to love or despise Him, forever. That is why Heaven can be a place where none sin, and why there is no escape from Hell. (None is desired. Not that people will enjoy Hell, but they know they will never be amenable to loving submission to God.)

But as I said, I'm NOT representing that as any sort of majority viewpoint. That is my own idea, and it's just faintly possible I could be wrong.

[Tallpine]

Both races fell, not because God messed up, but because He created us to be so like Him (i.e., with the power to think, to judge, to create, to imagine), that we imagined our own judgement was as good as His.

Well, that's your thought and judgement and imagination 

[MechAg94]

I guess that idea falls in line with the whole Sin of Pride/arrogance thing.  Arrogance is a very common failing among men also. 

[Neemi]

But we (and I think, the angels) have enough of God's image to make the mistake of thinking we can do without God, or that we can know better than God. It is my (admittedly unorthodox) point of view that the angels that were going to fall, fell almost immediately, because as spiritual beings they could see God as He is. They knew almost immediately whether they would love or hate Him. We humans, being physical, don't see God so clearly (through a glass darkly, as St. Paul says). It takes us longer to make up our minds. I think that also explains why we don't worry about any more of the angels falling, and why the Bible says nothing about redemption for the fallen angels. Due to their more immediate knowledge of God, their minds are very firmly made up, and always have been. I think that also explains why humans who waver between sinfulness and holiness on Earth, will be strictly one or the other in eternity. When we see God the way the angels see him (without the mediation of the physical world), we will once for all make up our minds firmly to love or despise Him, forever. That is why Heaven can be a place where none sin, and why there is no escape from Hell. (None is desired. Not that people will enjoy Hell, but they know they will never be amenable to loving submission to God.)

But as I said, I'm NOT representing that as any sort of majority viewpoint. That is my own idea, and it's just faintly possible I could be wrong.

I don't claim to have all the answers, either, but here's what I believe... and it's got some similarities to what's already been stated.

Before we lived on Earth, we lived with God. We didn't have bodies, and God wanted us to go to earth to learn, grow, and get bodies. When God presented His plan to all of the spirits (us), He asked for a volunteer to be the Savior (because let's face it - we knew we'd need one).

Jesus and this other guy both volunteered, although only Jesus said he'd follow the plan as outlined. The other guy wanted to change it so that he got all of the power and recognition and everybody had to do everything he said. Very few liked that plan. None of us did. He got kicked out of heaven with his group of followers - and became the Devil.

The rest of us chose to follow the plan and so then God created the world/universe for us - however He did it. I'm no expert. And in any case, none of us can remember this previous existence so we depend on what we know here and the writings of the prophets to guide us. And now we're here.

Where'd I get this viewpoint? Some of it is from my reading in the Bible, but some of it is from my beliefs as a Mormon.

I have enjoyed reading everyone else's viewpoints - so thanks for letting me share mine, whether you agree with it or not.

[cordex]

The real questions are: could Adam and Eve have beaten a polygraph when they were asked if they'd eaten of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and would Satan have been jailed if he'd published information about how to do it?

I don't, either. It is generally supposed (kind of an assumption everyone seems to make) that Adam and Eve were adults at their creation. The narrative doesn't say, but it is the nearly universal interpretation of the story.

As I said earlier, most religious tradition doesn't really come from scripture.

When they were only a day old, they appeared to be, say, 18 or 30, or whatever the case may have been. I think the same is probably true for the universe. It was created as a fully-developed, expanding universe, and this may mean it looks billions of years old, to us, even if it is but several thousand years old. Not because He was trying to fool anyone, but maybe that is just the only way to make a suitable universe.

That's fair enough, and certainly a creator capable of spontaneously generating the universe could create it however he likes.  Of course (if you want to go full-on Descartes), it is equally possible that today is really day zero, and that every photon, every subatomic particle, every chemical interaction, every life, every memory, every star, every historical artifact and fossil is brand new, just created in such a manner to tell the story and reflect the "history" of all existence to date.  It is possible that my memories of every interaction up to now are nothing more than God perfectly mimicking what might have happened.  If so, it would be no more or less a deception than starting off with a creation that displays the light of stars that never really existed and creates a false record of every interaction up to the point it was created.

I may be wrong about that, and I'd like to look into that a little more in the future. (Yes, to be abundantly clear, I'm down with the 6, 24-hour days, and a universe that is several thousand years old.)

Thanks for clarifying.

It is my (admittedly unorthodox) point of view that the angels that were going to fall, fell almost immediately, because as spiritual beings they could see God as He is. They knew almost immediately whether they would love or hate Him. We humans, being physical, don't see God so clearly (through a glass darkly, as St. Paul says). It takes us longer to make up our minds. I think that also explains why we don't worry about any more of the angels falling, and why the Bible says nothing about redemption for the fallen angels. Due to their more immediate knowledge of God, their minds are very firmly made up, and always have been. I think that also explains why humans who waver between sinfulness and holiness on Earth, will be strictly one or the other in eternity. When we see God the way the angels see him (without the mediation of the physical world), we will once for all make up our minds firmly to love or despise Him, forever. That is why Heaven can be a place where none sin, and why there is no escape from Hell. (None is desired. Not that people will enjoy Hell, but they know they will never be amenable to loving submission to God.)

So in your theory, what establishes the difference between a holy and sinful mind?  This is essentially predeterminism, is it not?  If each mind requires only sufficient exposure to God to be shunted into the category to which it was already assigned, what room is there for choice or true human redemption?  And eventually, no matter what choices an individual makes, they will be booted into heaven or hell (however you picture those - that would be a fun discussion too) based on some inherent tendency toward accepting or rejecting God.  No evil person could be saved, nor good person swayed toward evil when eventually faced with God, or am I misunderstanding?

Before we lived on Earth, we lived with God. We didn't have bodies, and God wanted us to go to earth to learn, grow, and get bodies. When God presented His plan to all of the spirits (us), He asked for a volunteer to be the Savior (because let's face it - we knew we'd need one).

Do you have a Biblical basis for this concept, or is it one contained in the Book of Mormon?  Outside of trying to read the Book of Mormon once and taking advantage of some home storage opportunities that are offered by the LDS, I admit I have only a cursory understanding of Mormon doctrine, but I hadn't heard the idea of human souls living with God prior to creation.

[roo_ster]

From gov't over-classification to cover screw ups on to Adam & Eve Creation analysis. 

This is either a Dan Brown novel or APS.

[Neemi]

Do you have a Biblical basis for this concept, or is it one contained in the Book of Mormon?  Outside of trying to read the Book of Mormon once and taking advantage of some home storage opportunities that are offered by the LDS, I admit I have only a cursory understanding of Mormon doctrine, but I hadn't heard the idea of human souls living with God prior to creation.

There are a few Biblical references that, imho, show that we lived with God before we lived here. Perhaps you read them differently, but this is how I read them.
Jeremiah 1:5 says that God knew Jeremiah long before he was born.
Job 38:7 God comforts Job - while Job may not remember or know all of God's creations, he was there when God created them and he rejoiced
There's a few more: Ecclesiastes 12:7 states that our spirts return to the God who gave them life (I read it as God is the father of my soul/spiritual self)
Paul loves to preach about how we are the offspring of God (Acts 17:28)

A lot of the reading comes from the Book of Moses (Joseph Smith was reading the Bible, asked for some clarification and voila!) So yeah, we believe this book was originally given to Moses but lost through time. There's more in the Book of Abraham, but it's not as plainly written. If you dare venture into that book, I'd say stick to chapter 3 verses 22-25, possibly through verse 28. (On its own, the book of Abraham is an interesting read on how God used the geocentric view of the universe to teach the gospel to Abraham. So yeah. Not the best place to start reading) Easy way out: start here.

One other source: in high school we read a translation of Genesis 1-5 that has stuck with me ever since. It was from the Talmud (Jewish scripture) and we were reading it to learn about source material. It was a poorly photocopied source from a very old English translation of the Talmud, and I couldn't tell you which one. But from that reading, it offered a different view of Genesis 1-5. In that version, it was more apparent that humanity was the offspring of God and that we were all very excited about the ongoing creation.

I wish I still had that source.

[Perd Hapley]

So in your theory, what establishes the difference between a holy and sinful mind?  This is essentially predeterminism, is it not?  If each mind requires only sufficient exposure to God to be shunted into the category to which it was already assigned, what room is there for choice or true human redemption?  And eventually, no matter what choices an individual makes, they will be booted into heaven or hell (however you picture those - that would be a fun discussion too) based on some inherent tendency toward accepting or rejecting God.  No evil person could be saved, nor good person swayed toward evil when eventually faced with God, or am I misunderstanding?

No, I would not say it is predetermination. I'm talking about people choosing whether to obey or disobey. The more we know of God, the more we become committed to our free choice to love or hate Him. I think C.S. Lewis said that by being more surrendered to God's will, we become more ourselves. Perhaps this is a similar concept.