The Council of Orange

A Puritan's Mind ^ | 529 AD | Council of Orange

[dsc]

"Yes I understand that the Bible uses metaphors, but that is only a modern viewpoint. For many centuries people held the Bible to be the absolute truth on all matters, religious and scientific."

It is incorrect to say that the use of allegories in the Bible is only a modern viewpoint. Just not so. This understanding dates back centuries, at least, in both Judaism and Christianity. Further, the use of parables by Our Lord suggests that this was a common concept in His time.

While fallible men may have held the Bible to be the absolute truth on matters scientific, a brief glance should suffice to show that the Bible nowhere makes that claim for itself, and that claim is not, nor has it ever been, a part of doctrine.

If you were considering a scientific argument, you would not (I presume) take the very worst position to be found in the history of the Dark Ages and hold it to be the totality of the argument. And yet this kind of faulty reasoning seems to be the very foundation of your opposition to religion.

"Humans have existed for only a brief drop in the course of Time and from our earliest ancestors we have been able to prove(disprove) religious "truth" by scientific reason."

That is also incorrect. Science has disproved absolutely nothing that belongs, or ever has belonged, to the doctrines either of Judaism or Christianity.

"Good and Evil are only cultural constructs."

Good and evil are, among other things, unequivocal statements by God about His nature. It would be an error to say that they are as constant as the speed of light, because they are much more so. They predated the existence of photons, and will continue unchanged after the temporary construct we call the universe has ceased to exist.

"If there is a God his language and thus vehicle for communicating his plan is in the language of physics and science not bedtime stories"

If there is a God, His language for communicating is whatever He wants it to be, and mortal man is incapable of second-guessing how He "would" speak to man.

Looks to me like you're grounding your denial of "bed-time stories" in your presumed ability to second-guess what God "would" do, when by definition you would be unable to second-guess an omnipotent and omniscient God.

Scientifically speaking, there are no grounds for denying either the existence of God, or that He has spoken to men and women in a number of formats. In denying this, you are leaving science behind and basing your position on a religious tenet.

I say, "God spoke to me."
You say, "No he didn't."
"How do you know."
"Because there is no God."
"How do you know."
"Because if there were He would speak to us, and He doesn't speak to us."
"But he spoke to me."
"No he didn't."
"How do you know."
"Because there is no God."
"How do you know."
"Because he doesn't speak to us."
"But he spoke to me."
"No he didn't."
"How do you know."
"Because there is no God."
"How do you know."
"Because he doesn't speak to us."

You ain't got to be Einstein to see what's wrong with that picture.

Enstein called science "thinking God's thoughts after Him." Certainly physics and science deal with God's handiwork, and in that sense are a form of communication.

In structuring the laws of thermodynamics as He did, for instance, He tells us a great deal about the laws of spiritual dynamics (which predated and will outlive our universe).

But if there is an omnipotent, omniscient God, He would certainly have any number of resources at His command, wouldn't you think? And would be able to communicate in many different formats? Including some we would never be able to guess or imagine in a million years?

If a scientist were to apply the same intellectual rigor to religious questions that he applies to scientific questions, he would soon discover that his objections are either grounded in misconception (as I briefly discussed in my last post) or are completely unsupported assumptions.

Perhaps that's why so many scientists believe in God. More hard scientists than psychologists or sociologists, which seems suggestive to me.

[dangus]

Gee, I dunno. I'll confess I was tweaking you; I wasn't even familiar with the passage. I thought you were describing unfallen Adam in Eden, even though it struck me as a problemmatic description...

Do angels possess free will? That's a toughie. It's said in certain Catholic circumstances that "Satan rebelled." Doesn't that suggest free will? But I don't know the scriptural basis for that, and there are several other beliefs that do state that angels are at the command of Christ. And I think I recall that that was what set Man apart was that he *had* free will, so he could love God whereas the angels could only obey.

Gosh, angels are so wierd... There's no mnetion of God creating them, yet they must be created, because they are not creator. Or must only material things be created? OK, you got me... my knowledge about angels is almost zip, except some wierd medieval phylogeny of angels (angels, archangels, dominions, powers, thrones, cherubim and serpahim) and the biblican encounters with them.

[DoorGunner]

From my understanding angels do not possess free will. They are ministering spirits (Heb 1:14) subject to God's command.

I do not know why you would say that "angels do not possess free will." Of course, the angels who still work for God are "ministering spirits subject to God's command." On the other hand, those angels who chose to follow satan follow his commands.

Revelation 12:
7And there was war in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against
the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8But he was
not strong enough, and they lost their place in heaven. 9The great
dragon was hurled down--that ancient serpent called the devil, or
Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth,
and his angels with him.

Satan chose to be PROUD, and in that pride, pretended that he was equal to God:

Ezekiel 28:
1 .... " 'In the pride of your heart you say, "I am a god; I sit on the throne of a god....


15 You were blameless in your ways
from the day you were created
till wickedness was found in you.
17 Your heart became proud
on account of your beauty,
and you corrupted your wisdom
because of your splendor.

Isaiah 14:
12
"How you have fallen from heaven,
O star of the morning, son of the dawn!
You have been cut down to the earth,
You who have weakened the nations!
13
"But you said in your heart,
'I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne above the stars of God,
And I will sit on the mount of assembly
In the recesses of the north.
14
'I will ascend above the heights of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High.'


Since satan, being an angel, chose to rebel against God; it is reasonable to assume that the angels of satan also chose to rebel, along with satan.

DG

[HarleyD]

Well, your right about 1/3 of the angels following Satan. Satan we know was proud. The Bible is unclear as to why the rest were booted out.

The reason I say there is no free will in heaven is that the angels could be booted out at any time-not just this one time occurrence. And clearly there is not anything in Heaven that could “tempt” an angel so what would be the point of “free will”?***

Of course, then we’ve come full circle. Since there is nothing in Heaven for Satan to have been tempted with, what caused him to sin? I certainly don’t believe it was “free will”. But even from a Calvinist perspective the text says “I created you blameless” makes it difficult to understand. I do believe that God knew that this would happen I has been it total control.

There is so little written about this. I looked it up last night in a number of commentaries and found they said there was little written about this.

Personally, I believe it relates somehow to mankind and God's salvation and while clues are there, we are not to know about it yet. But I have no scripture verses to back that up with. That's why I said this is one of those mysteries.

***Footnote: It’s interesting that great men of God where very humble men. And God commands us to be humble. This is the opposite of Satan who was “proud”. One has to think our Christian walk must be wrapped up in humility/pride issue – not doing "good" things. Doing good things is the result of humility.

[DoorGunner]

 

Well, your right about 1/3 of the angels following Satan. Satan we know was proud. The Bible is unclear as to why the rest were booted out.

It wasn't merely that he was "proud." He entertained delusions that he was equal to God.

They were "booted out," because they "waged war." (rebelled):

Revelation 12:

7 And there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels waging
war with the dragon. The dragon and his angels waged war,

8 and they were not strong enough, and there was no longer a place
found for them in heaven.

 

 

The reason I say there is no free will in heaven is that the angels could be booted out at any time-not just this one time occurrence.

Although the Bible does not mention any other such incident, I know of no passage which says this is impossible. 

And clearly there is not anything in Heaven that could "tempt" an angel so what would be the point of "free will"?***

Clearly, there IS such a thing. For one, there are more exalted places, or positions, which satan wanted, and presumably his angels wanted. Presumably, there still exist exalted places, or positions, which the "good" angels might still covet?

 

Of course, then we've come full circle. Since there is nothing in Heaven for Satan to have been tempted with, what caused him to sin?

As we see, above, there was(is) "something" in heaven, for which satan lusted.

I certainly don't believe it was "free will".

Please permit me to say that I think that you may not see what is clearly stated in scripture, because you have already decided this issue. [Granted, I could be making the same error.]

But even from a Calvinist perspective the text says "I created you blameless" makes it difficult to understand.

Yes.

Personally, I believe it relates somehow to mankind and God's salvation...

Agreed.

 ***Footnote: It's interesting that great men of God where very humble men. And God commands us to be humble. This is the opposite of Satan who was "proud". One has to think our Christian walk must be wrapped up in humility/pride issue...

Agreed. I believe that this is a very important aspect of The Way, which is largely ignored in modern Christianity.

- not doing "good" things. Doing good things is the result of humility.

Although I, personally, would ascribe good deeds to (agape) love, humility and agape go hand in hand.

DG

 

 

 

[HarleyD]

"They were "booted out," because they "waged war."

I was thinking that God spoke and the universe was created. All God probably said was, "Bye". So much for the war. :O)

[DoorGunner]

All God probably said was, "Bye". So much for the war. :O)

I see by the "smiley" that you are saying this lightly, so I am unsure what you are intending to communicate.

Surely, you are aware that there has been, and continues to be, a WAR between the angels on the side of God, and the angels on the side of satan. This is an important issue. The followers of Yeshua (Greek=Jesus) are, right now, (supposed to be) engaged in that very war:

Ephesians 6
12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but
against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of
this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in
the heavenly places.

This war between good and wicked is REAL, it is NOW, and it is taking place inside us, and outside of us.

DG