1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Could Satan Repent and Be Saved?

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by NulliuSINverba, Nov 25, 2014.

  1. NulliuSINverba

    NulliuSINverba Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Ratings:
    +136
    Religion:
    None
    "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." ~ John 3:16

    Whoever? Does that even cover Satan?

    Some additional questions:

    Do you believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God?
    Do you believe that Satan has free will?
    Do you believe that the "whoever" on John 3:16 needs an asterisk?

    At least one Christian claims to know that it is impossible for Satan to repent:

    "It is not an issue of whether or not God will let the fallen angels and Satan repent. When we say 'let them repent,' it implies that God will allow them or give them permission to change their ways."

    Read that quote a few times. Doesn't it sound like Matt Slick (the clownish apologist/huckster linked and quoted above and below) is saying that Satan and the rest of the fallen angels have no choice in the matter? Isn't he flatly declaring that Satan would require God's permission to change?

    That's an interesting thing to consider. Does it follow that Satan needed God's permission to rebel? Or was that a free decision? What does this say about the manner in which some Christians conceive of free will? What does it say about their view of evil?

    Doesn't this sound like Slick believes that evil was created by God and is held in place by His will? In an even more embarrassing assertion Slick goes on to offer the following definition of evil:

    "Evil is the opposite of God's holiness. It is the desire to do that which is against God, to inflict pain and suffering, and to have extreme malice towards anyone."

    Shall we ignore the fact that the Bible is chock-stock with instances of God ordering the infliction of pain and suffering and exhibiting malicious intent?

    See: Do As I Say And Not As I Do.

    Where in the Bible does it explicitly state that Jesus didn't die to redeem the totality of all sin? Where does it explicitly state that Satan is somehow exempt from grace?

    "Furthermore, there is no atoning sacrifice by which sins of the demonic realm could be removed."

    How can he possibly know that? Slick just pulled that one out of his *** thin air, didn't he? Why am I not surprised?

    ...

    No one said that it had to make sense, I suppose.
     
    #1 NulliuSINverba, Nov 25, 2014
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2014
  2. Robert.Evans

    Robert.Evans You will be assimilated; it is His Will.

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2014
    Messages:
    6,793
    Ratings:
    +520
    Religion:
    Syncretic Theist
    You ask a big question.
    The logos or higher concsiousness evolves how it evolves. It turns out the way it turns out, because of what it is. There are many sides to it, but it can be narrowed down at the beginning to left and right or good and evil. If evil is the Adversary, and if the process of action of God is fractal, then ultimately he will not die and will be saved and not saved all the time. The reason is because there are many instances of this entity that we call S-tan.
    Yahudee (Judas) was the one that represented him on earth, (which means therefore there can be many on earth) and he did repent. But he also died. So what do we make of that, saved or not saved. It is a hard subject. There are so many aspects of God to consider, I don't even know if I could begin to understand it. But part of it would be saved and part would not. As the Self itself of the person is many, there are aspects saved and aspects not. As all creation through the many worlds and universes and realitites is infinite, perhaps it is not whether he will be, but when, and which aspect..

    Not much help I guess, but a difficult one to understand let alone explain.
     
  3. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    46,871
    Ratings:
    +4,384
    The story I got has a line of logic in it.
    The angels made a choice.
    That choice ...Man is made less than we are. He should be made to serve us.

    There's nothing wrong with that logic.
    We humans do so to all things less than we are.
    We do so, even unto each other.

    To 'whom' do we bear resemblance?

    A fight broke out....brother angel against brother angel.
    One third fell.
    They fell for the argument and logic...over something that looks like us.
    They might want us dead.

    Two thirds lost their brothers over something that looks like us.....
    They might not care.

    Repent? when the item at hand bears resemblance to the fallen?

    What is Man that heaven is mindful of him?
     
  4. Pastek

    Pastek Sunni muslim

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    2,399
    Ratings:
    +546
    Religion:
    Islam



    In the Quran it states that Satan is cursed until the Day of resurection.
    So i agree that he can't repent without God's permission.

    15.34-35 [ Allah ] said, "Then get out of it, for indeed, you are expelled.

    And indeed, upon you is the curse until the Day of Recompense."

    When someone is cursed he have no permission to repent, we can see that exemple with Pharaoh :

    Exodus 7.3 : But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in Egypt, he will not listen to you.
     
  5. te_lanus

    te_lanus Alien Hybrid

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2009
    Messages:
    2,716
    Ratings:
    +838
    Religion:
    Canaanite
    Whoever? Does that even cover Satan?

    Why would an invented myth need to repent? Satan was invented so that man's failing can be blamed on someone else.

    Do you believe that the Bible is the inerrant word of God?

    No. The Bible was edited multiple times by different people to fit the theology of the day.
     
  6. seeking4truth

    seeking4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2012
    Messages:
    724
    Ratings:
    +76
    "Why would an invented myth need to repent? Satan was invented so that man's failing can be blamed on someone else."

    I understand 'satan' to be the tendency of humans to follow their baser inclinations to be self serving rather than serving the greater society. ie. not a individual entity. All of us make a choice whether to be selfish or not, to be honest or not satan is that voice which tempts us to choose the wrong way.

    What interests me is that in the Holy Quran, and maybe in the Old Testament too, even after Iblis following his baser instincts disobeys God and is turned out of the'garden' he makes a request of God and God grants his request.
    Sura Al Araf(ch.7) v.14-16

    Iblis obviously believe in God and therefore is not beyond salvation.
     
  7. Brickjectivity

    Brickjectivity Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Messages:
    29,352
    Ratings:
    +10,524
    Religion:
    liber-scripta grim Christian
    James 2:24 "You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone." A parent who beats their child nightly cannot be saved simply by belief. That is a lie perpetrated by slavers and those who find it inconvenient to change their behavior. It isn't the belief that saves people. What Jesus said was that the key to forgiveness is humility. "all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted." (Luke 18:14) Humility is something that Satan can never have, so Satan cannot repent.

    But I agree with Te's honestly that Satan is not a person but represents the internal enemy of humanity. In you is some thing which always opposes good actions and starts fights. There is a name for it. There is no need for an external power to tempt you. Sometimes it is convenient to speak of our internal evil as an enemy in order avoid friendly fire and blaming each other.
     
    #7 Brickjectivity, Nov 25, 2014
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2014
  8. Yeshe Dondrub

    Yeshe Dondrub Kagyupa OBT-Thubetan

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2014
    Messages:
    97
    Ratings:
    +18
    Religion:
    Buddhist (Kagyupa) (Core Dharma), comparitive religions
    It is hard to have a good story without an enemy to it.

    Or reflection. In some earlier aspects of the old testament, Satan still spoke with god, and tested humanity. Then as aspects were rewritten beyond Jewish texts, the form changed.

    A good reflection now would be that of Satans desires, ego, to be in control and have power. Some use that same reflection today to control others, with desire to do so, be right, and also fall as a result.

    In Buddhism, outside the historical aspects, Siddhartha faced Mara in meditation. However it was clear that Mara was only an aspect of himself, the negative aspect that was just part of his mind, that he needed to overcome.

    He was challenged with ego, desire, seduction, and was detached from it. He over came those aspects in himself. The I was removed.

    Mara and and later Satan both came to reflect the ego, desire, power, seduction aspects.

    While consumed one can't have clarity. One has to work with his own mind, or he remains blinded.

    Removing Satan from the bible would change the story, predictions, and reflections used to be an example of how behavior can be bad. Even claims of God's acts in his name, are exaples of how it will have no true benefit.
     
  9. viole

    viole Metaphysical Naturalist
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2014
    Messages:
    9,898
    Ratings:
    +4,787
    Religion:
    Gnostic Atheism
    Nope. That would nullify the prophecy of John's Revelation which expects a certain, nasty, behaviour from Satan in order to be true. And failed prophecies are a no-no if God is really omniscient.

    But Who knows? Maybe Satan did indeed repent and that is why Jesus return is missing in action. That would mess God's plans completely making Satan a real genius. Saved, with the bonus of having ridiculed the Boss's ability to anticipate the future.

    Ciao

    - viole
     
  10. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,648
    Ratings:
    +1,697
    Religion:
    Jesus
    Satan is a representation of our lower psyche. When Jesus 'argues' with 'satan', satan remains nameless, hence not an identifiable entity that directly opposes Jesus merely to oppose Jesus, but opposes symbolically as any actual entity would. Satan therefore in this context is symbolic, not a being, so 'repenting' etc. is sort of a moot point here. The 'entity' is already related to Jesus, even called the same title, so Jesus really is, in some sense, already what is considered the 'devil' by various names. 'Satan' as a being is probably more like an amalgamation of mythic beings, but not a specific being going by that name. So, in conclusion, we can say that the caricature commonly thought of as 'satan' is already a follower of Jesus, or is Jesus himself in a lower manifestation form.
     
    #10 Desert Snake, Nov 25, 2014
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2014
  11. Thief

    Thief Rogue Theologian

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2009
    Messages:
    46,871
    Ratings:
    +4,384
    I'm not sure if I can go quite as far as you did.
    To say that 'satan' is a character trait could work.
    even though the name was dealt to Peter's face as if a proper name.

    To speak of the satan as we do the ....'id'.....could work.

    But I would not discount the notion of an entity that personifies what the 'satan' is.....
    and he would be Satan.
     
  12. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,648
    Ratings:
    +1,697
    Religion:
    Jesus
    Yes, right, but notice the 'name' is not exclusive, it's more like a title. This is odd to me, if there is a title being used as a name, why not make that clear. I haven't looked at the earliest translations, but why leave it vague.
     
  13. NulliuSINverba

    NulliuSINverba Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Ratings:
    +136
    Religion:
    None
    Would anyone care to cite an Old Testament "prophecy" that predicts that the Messiah would end up getting crucified?

    My question was not "Do you think Satan will repent?" It was more along the lines of "Was Satan covered by the Crucifixion?"
     
  14. NulliuSINverba

    NulliuSINverba Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Ratings:
    +136
    Religion:
    None


    So on the "Day of Recompense," Satan could conceivably repent and God (being all-merciful) would forgive?

    It sounds as if God was stacking the deck. What chance did Pharaoh have if God was manipulating him in such a fashion?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Pastek

    Pastek Sunni muslim

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    Messages:
    2,399
    Ratings:
    +546
    Religion:
    Islam


    No because he have to repent before he dies as it's stated here :

    4.18 But repentance is not [accepted] of those who [continue to] do evil deeds up until, when death comes to one of them, he says, "Indeed, I have repented now," or of those who die while they are disbelievers.

    I don't remember in detail what's in the Bible concerning Satan so it's just the point of view from Islam.

    It says in the Quran that the Devil exposed to God his plan against humanity and asked for a delay and also many verses talk about him in hell.

    As for Pharaoh he repented but too late as it was just before he died and in the verse 4.18 it says that then it's not possible.

    10.90 (...) and Pharaoh and his soldiers pursued them in tyranny and enmity until, when drowning overtook him, he said, "I believe that there is no deity except that in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am of the Muslims (submitted to God)."

    It says in an other verse that he will be in hell :

    11.97-99 (...) but they followed the command of Pharaoh, and the command of Pharaoh was not [at all] discerning. He will precede his people on the Day of Resurrection and lead them into the Fire.

    I don't remember very well at which moment exactly God hardened Pharaoh's heart in the Bible. In the Quran it was not since the beginning but after he refused to believe (after the miracles) and continued to persecute the Israelites.
     
  16. NulliuSINverba

    NulliuSINverba Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Ratings:
    +136
    Religion:
    None
    Thanks for all the tangentially relevant material. Peace be upon thee.
     
  17. NulliuSINverba

    NulliuSINverba Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Ratings:
    +136
    Religion:
    None
    So it would be a mistake to attribute literal existence to “him?” That's what you're saying, correct?

    If Satan isn't a name, what is it?

    Some translations appear to go so far as to offer The Devil as a proper noun. Are these instances of Divinely Inspired Capitalization … or human error?

    Wait. Actual entities don't oppose symbolically. They oppose actually.

    So Jesus was tempting himself?

    Jesus Is The Devil.

    You heard it here first!

    That's Fundamentally Extracted Theology at its finest.

    Satan is a lower manifestation of Jesus?

    :::howls of derisive laughter:::



    If I held your opinions, I'd give thanks that the church isn't burning heretics these days. In fact, that may go a long way towards explaining why you hold those opinions.[/quote][/QUOTE]
     
  18. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,648
    Ratings:
    +1,697
    Religion:
    Jesus
    No, but we don't know if this is literal. This is Jesus 'interacting' with 'satan', but Jesus also called Peter 'Satan', does that make Peter Satan? (no, of course not.)

    Satan is a name. It's also a title. So we look at context, to determine a possible identity of the persona. Unless you think Peter is actually Satan.

    Probably neither. 'Divinely inspired capilization' is a ridiculous assertion.

    What symbolic entities can do is demonstrate what entities will do. Like fictional books, where the actions of the characters are believable, but not actually 'occuring'.

    If taken symbolically, then yes. If 'talking' to His lower psyche, then yes.


    'Satan' as an adversary yet part of our basal psyche means that yes, if this narrative is symbolic, the satan here is Jesus, an aspect of him.

    No idea what this means.

    In this context, yes Satan is a manifestation of Jesus.
    Your cultural zeitgeist has nothing to do with me, and has nothing to do with my beliefs.
     
  19. NulliuSINverba

    NulliuSINverba Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2014
    Messages:
    798
    Ratings:
    +136
    Religion:
    None

    Obviously, he did quite literally refer to Peter as"Satan." Interesting to mull over how that impacts an announcement like:

    "Now I say to you that you are Peter (which means 'rock'), and upon this rock I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it." ~ Matthew 16:18

    It gets even better down below when you assert that Satan is a manifestation of Jesus.

    Would be be so kind as to provide a source to support that claim?

    Again, it seems pretty obvious that when Jesus said "Get thee behind me Satan!" he was talking to Satan and not to Peter. If he'd been talking to Peter, don't you suppose that he would have said "Get thee behind me, Peter?"

    Oh really? Feel free to explain why Translation A of The Divinely Inspired Word Of God opts to capitalize "Satan" and Translation B of The Divinely Inspired Word Of God opts for the lowercase 's.'

    That example is especially fitting for a discussion of the Bible. Thanks so much!

    Why bother making a distinction if the answer in both cases is "yes?"

    Wow. Jesus is Satan?

    If the context was 500-odd years ago in Europe, you'd be a charcoal briquette at an auto-da-fé. Just saying.

    You are free to deny it all you like, but it's actually OUR cultural zeitgeist.
     
  20. Desert Snake

    Desert Snake ️️️️️️️️️️

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    20,648
    Ratings:
    +1,697
    Religion:
    Jesus
    In this context, basically yes. Of course by default this would also make the virgin Mary, the mother of Satan.
    Your other questions are only signifying that you want to argue the topic without knowing the topic.
     
Loading...