I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.--Isaiah xiv, 7.
First, Satan has been here for a long time. He "appears" as such as a result of a change. And we know that the change determines his "fall." On the other hand, despite personifying evil, satan is not destroyed. punished? Unless you regard "ruling this world" (2 Corinthians 4:4) as enough of a punishment
How is God so lenient with Satan? He could zap him out of existence. Instead, keeps him at arm's length.
Hint: What is Job's righteousness without Satan's trials?
Indeed it appears the devil is evil & there are several ways to look at this:
*Ontological: Good & evil are ontologically together. One cannot be thought without the other.
*Cosmological: History begins with goodness. Evil is a "perversion" of an original state, a virus that infects many but not all. In the distant future, after the end of history, evil will disappear, and the world will revert to its original state of bliss.
*Instrumental: (defended by Baruch Spinoza) goodness is what is useful to us, evil the opposite.
*Nihilistic: Nietzsche's transvaluation of all values aims to erase Christian, pietistic interpretations.
*Mythological: Good and evil are not antithetical but necessary opposites: In Egypt, there's Ra, Osiris, and Isis against Apep, the serpent, and Set, the ravager, father of deceit and lies. The Phoenicians opposed Baal to Moloch, and in India, Indra is opposed to Vritra. So, there is a deeper mythological archetype that brands this good/evil association as necessary.
___________
Now, my thought experiment: Could Satan be forgiven?
Well, it's conceivable, within the limits of god's omnibenevolence (all goodness).
1. To be forgiven, Satan would have to repent (we are in a reign of freedom; see how important free will becomes for the understanding of repentance). To repent means to change one's way, which is implicit in the very notion of identity. I take Sartre's definition of being-for-itself from Being and Nothingness: identity is not what it is, and it is what it is not.
2. Satan hasn't changed because he's chosen not to. His "fall" rests on this premise, but Satan doesn't have to (sempiternally) be this way. One cannot invoke Satan's "nature" to cause Satan's becoming without begging the question of Satan's identity.
What I'm getting at is that Satan's identity cannot be self-ruled. Once again, Sartre says, "l'existence précède l'essence" (existence precedes essence). Identity is what one finds and defines as one lives. Why? because identity is in time, and time is change.
Another point: Satan's identity, his evil nature, is related to the very exclusion of goodness. However, in order for Satan to reject the good, he must reason it, weigh it, and reject it (even in the heart of evil, there must be a space for guilt). Only that Satan's guilt is fed back as contempt (yes, Satan is pretty self-destructive).
Satan's evil (what we call "satanic") means a constant rejection of goodness. In a sense, Satan is not what he is. So, there is always more or less to identity than itself. This is more or less time and the unpredictable future. Satan's identity—as stereotyped and beleaguered as it is—is no exception.
3. Satan's repentance is a decision reversal from that primeval rebellious act. Though he cannot become Lucifer again (since time and history cannot be undone), one can only speculate that he becomes something other than Satan. This should be good enough for Satan and for God.
You see, it's not God's business to meddle in one's retraction as long as it is genuine. This has been principled since the beginning of creation. Sure, one may dispute Satan's capacity for such a decision to change, but if Satan is free, one should never rule out this possibility.
This angel-who-was-once-Satan wishes no more of his past. Now he will be content with God's forgiveness in oblivion.
Surprise!
(Will it be time for another proud & inexperienced angel to take his place?)
How is God so lenient with Satan? He could zap him out of existence. Instead, keeps him at arm's length.
Hint: What is Job's righteousness without Satan's trials?
Indeed it appears the devil is evil & there are several ways to look at this:
*Ontological: Good & evil are ontologically together. One cannot be thought without the other.
*Cosmological: History begins with goodness. Evil is a "perversion" of an original state, a virus that infects many but not all. In the distant future, after the end of history, evil will disappear, and the world will revert to its original state of bliss.
*Instrumental: (defended by Baruch Spinoza) goodness is what is useful to us, evil the opposite.
*Nihilistic: Nietzsche's transvaluation of all values aims to erase Christian, pietistic interpretations.
*Mythological: Good and evil are not antithetical but necessary opposites: In Egypt, there's Ra, Osiris, and Isis against Apep, the serpent, and Set, the ravager, father of deceit and lies. The Phoenicians opposed Baal to Moloch, and in India, Indra is opposed to Vritra. So, there is a deeper mythological archetype that brands this good/evil association as necessary.
___________
Now, my thought experiment: Could Satan be forgiven?
Well, it's conceivable, within the limits of god's omnibenevolence (all goodness).
1. To be forgiven, Satan would have to repent (we are in a reign of freedom; see how important free will becomes for the understanding of repentance). To repent means to change one's way, which is implicit in the very notion of identity. I take Sartre's definition of being-for-itself from Being and Nothingness: identity is not what it is, and it is what it is not.
2. Satan hasn't changed because he's chosen not to. His "fall" rests on this premise, but Satan doesn't have to (sempiternally) be this way. One cannot invoke Satan's "nature" to cause Satan's becoming without begging the question of Satan's identity.
What I'm getting at is that Satan's identity cannot be self-ruled. Once again, Sartre says, "l'existence précède l'essence" (existence precedes essence). Identity is what one finds and defines as one lives. Why? because identity is in time, and time is change.
Another point: Satan's identity, his evil nature, is related to the very exclusion of goodness. However, in order for Satan to reject the good, he must reason it, weigh it, and reject it (even in the heart of evil, there must be a space for guilt). Only that Satan's guilt is fed back as contempt (yes, Satan is pretty self-destructive).
Satan's evil (what we call "satanic") means a constant rejection of goodness. In a sense, Satan is not what he is. So, there is always more or less to identity than itself. This is more or less time and the unpredictable future. Satan's identity—as stereotyped and beleaguered as it is—is no exception.
3. Satan's repentance is a decision reversal from that primeval rebellious act. Though he cannot become Lucifer again (since time and history cannot be undone), one can only speculate that he becomes something other than Satan. This should be good enough for Satan and for God.
You see, it's not God's business to meddle in one's retraction as long as it is genuine. This has been principled since the beginning of creation. Sure, one may dispute Satan's capacity for such a decision to change, but if Satan is free, one should never rule out this possibility.
This angel-who-was-once-Satan wishes no more of his past. Now he will be content with God's forgiveness in oblivion.
Surprise!
(Will it be time for another proud & inexperienced angel to take his place?)
No comments:
Post a Comment