Satan: Bad guy or bum rap?


#41

[quote=Wormwood] [font=Verdana]I have yet to meet a priest who has performed any comparable rituals, including exorcism. [/font][font=Verdana]:stuck_out_tongue: [/font]
[/quote]


You may not have met a priest perform an exorcism as of yet…and yet if you did, would you believe? Would you contact Fr Amorth, the chief exorcist in Rome? Exorcisms are becoming rampant there as the use of different occult materials have increased.

Wormwood, you cannot believe my own words as witnessing one…it is not good enough for you. You need to see for yourself. But I have a feeling, even if you did, you would philosophize it away. If you saw a dead person come alive, it probably would not phase you (Jesus’ words).

Anyhoo, I know you…and your potential to be such a great soul. And this will happen…in God’s time, it will happen! :smiley:

I will come back on this thread later…I do have 2 jobs now and it is wearisome. But I will be back! :bounce:


#42

guys: wormwood DOES NOT WANT to understand, if he wants to be the devil’s advocate let him be and just pray for him.


#43

[quote=Wormwood] What sort of things have you seen exactly? Was it luck that I witnessed no success? Or was it a skeptical mindset? The people were proposed masters of the black arts, everything from voodoo priests to people claiming to possess the “true” necronomicon. All were imposters. A certain level of belief was required to achieve “results”. If their magic were true, it would prove itself by virtue of it’s deeds. That has yet to happen. The only way that these occultist survive is fleecing tourists, and recieving aid from secret societies and such (hellfire club and the like). If they had true power, could they not create wealth. or seize it from an enemy? Perhaps they should be reviled for offering false hope to people, but feared? I think not.
[/quote]

oh, Wormwood, it was “horrible beyond conception”

Okay, really now all HPL references aside, would it matter if I told you? Your perpetual skeptical nature seems to have made it impossible for you to believe anything with certiantude. Anyway…

In a black room (interior basement, lights out, door closed) a figure that was darker still.

Near a lakeside cemetary, saw someone get spooked (for lack of a better word), take off running, and after clearing the trees spin on one foot (as if struck by something). End result of three evenly spaced gashes through his shirt and into his chest.

and I will relate one other… went to bed and turned light off. woke up in middle of night, light was on, unplugged light, went back to sleep. woke up again, light on while I was holding the plug (which I had previously unplugged) in my hand several feet from any outlet.

That suffices for now, PM me if you are still skeptical.


#44

Forgive me for barging in, but the whole idea about Satan being the bad guy surely must have been rooted in Jewish Tradition, because otherwise it makes the statement in Matthew 9:34 by the Pharisees that Jesus is casting out demons by the power of the “Prince of Demons” meaningless.

Admittedly, they don’t mention him by name in that particular verse, but it’s obvious (to me, at least) that that’s what they are referring to.

I think it’s clear that they are suggesting that Jesus is as bad as it’s possible to get, so yes, Satan = Bad guy.

Have I missed the point? It’s quite possible. :slight_smile:

Beobab


#45

Hey Wormwood, I saw the devil once or twice, I could draw you a picture,but I dont want to :eek: it is still quite clear in my mind after all these years . This was before I was in any sense religious minded, so what I saw was’nt influenced by religion or any particular interest in religion, I was something like you, tough to believe in something you can’t see. But what else can I say, there he was standing in front of me, hard to deny what you see, I had a good long look so as I said I could draw you a picture but not for any :eek: money…just watch yourself . Adios


#46

[quote=Wormwood]Ok this time the title is real!! :slight_smile:
I know this seems like a pretty easy question but,
Before you starting furiously typing yes he is and why, here’s the reason I ask. I am tried to study the text without an implied understanding. That is to say, if someone said, “to work on the sabbath is a sin” I would ask what verse that appeared in and they could tell me. If I asked about easter, well I would get several different ways that easter became an implied custom. Having said that, I can’t find where Satan is pinned as the ultimate evil. At first he is chosen and second in heaven only to God. After he is banished from heaven, he appears a few more times, but never in the capacity I hear him spoken of now. Now it seems satan can be blamed for anything…our society is terrible because satan has our children under mind control and arguments likewise. When exactly does this occur? I can’t find where the hebrews curse satan for any of their misfortunes. When did this theory or practice originate? As a side question, if he tried to OVERTHROW GOD…and his punishment was to have to live here with us…what does that say about us? :wink:
[/quote]

IOW, your title asks one question - but your post asks a completely different one.

So which is your question ? ##


#47

There are very few references to the devil in the OT. In fact, in response to the objection that there is no mention of angels, as incorpereal beings at all in the book of Genesis, St Thomas Aquinas answers: ‘The reason is that Moses was addressing uncultured people who could not understand incorporeal beings. And if he had told them that there are beings that surpass all corporeal beings, they would have been tempted to idolatry.’ (ST, 1, 61, ad 1).

Johannes Smit makes a similar statement in his book concerning biblical sources on demons: ‘If one carefully reads the first chapters of Genesis, it seems that Moses purposely avoided speaking about evil spirits and their infestation. The Jews had a strong tendency to idolatry and they were always in danger of embracing polytheistic relgiions of their neighbors…In order to protect them from the error of dualism and preserve their monotheistim, God did not speak openly about the devil and his kingdom in the primitive revelation, nor did he speak of the devil’s evil indlucence on the world—or if he did, it was only in a veiled way’ (DD, p68)

Some pages later, after noting the rare references to the devil in the OT, Smit asserts: ‘I maintain that it was not by chance but it was intention on the part of Moses, the prophets and other sacred writers…and precisely so that satanic cults, superstition and religious dualism wouldn’t be introcuded among the Chosen People’ (op.cit., p.114).

The first time that the bible explicitly mentions Satan is in the prologue to the Book of Job (1:6-12; 2:1-7). ‘This text,’ says Zahringer, ‘provides a brief but profound compendium of the authentic biblical declarations concerning the devil. Satan is distinguished in an unmistakable way from the faithfuul retinue of God. He is not an avenging angel, like those that appear frequently in the OT. One can conclude from the text… that he seperated himself from God’s retinue and is emphatically described as an enemy of mankind. He is not only an angel of evil; he is a spirit that wants to ruin men by seperating them from God’ (MS, p.790).

Another text that shows clearly Satan’s opposition to God, which is only implied in the passage from the Book of Job, is Zechariah 3:1-5: 'And the Lord showed me Joshua the high priest, standing before the angel of Yahweh, with Satan standing on his right to accuse him. The angel of Yahweh said to Satan: ‘May Yahweh rebuke you, Satan; may Yahweh rebuke you, he who has made Jerudsalem his very own.’

S. Raponi comments on this text: ‘unlike the Book of Job, here the accuser seems to be transformed into a true adversary of God and his divine plan for salvation’ (SR, p201). But in this biblical passage Satan still appears as a figure subject to the will of God, since the angel of the Lord asks Yahweh to rebuke Satan.

A further expansion of biblical teaching is found int eh book of Wisdom: ‘For God formed man to be imperishable; the image of his own nature he mad ehim. But by the envy of the devil, death entered the world, and they who are in his possession experience it’ (2:23-24).


#48

S. Cipriani comments as follows: ‘Although his malicious traits are more accentuated, the devil remains only a tempter who can facilitate for man the path of evil and rebellion, but he cannot destroy man’s freedom. He is an enemy to watch out for, but he is not a mortal enemy, all the more so since God is on man’s side’ (SC, p.8). We add that there is also in the above text from the book of Wisdom an implicit reference to the devil as the tempter fo the first parents. It thus offers further clarification of the temptation and fall.

As regards the exegesis of that Genesis account, Zahringer states: ‘When the story of the temptation in the earthly paradise mentions a superhuman seducer who speaks through the mouth of a serpent, this serpent…should not be taken simply as a symbol of an interior temptation nor should the entire story be branded as a myth. (The account had to be expressed in the most universal manner possible, and for that reason the image of a crafty, evil serpent was especially suitable; it was something readily understood by people of that time and place.) Rather, the two passages from Genesis and the Book of Wisdom refer to a personal being who presents himself externally with his lies and calumny in order to seperate our first parents from God. But even the acocunt of the original sin does not leave any doubt that the tempter is under God’s rule’ (cf. Gn 3:14-16, where God curses the serpent; MS, pp. 791-792).

In conclusion, the teaching of the OT concerning Satan can be summarized as follows, as Zahringer points out: ‘The devil exists as a personal being under God’s do,minion and he tries to bring about man’s ruin in an ominous manner by prompting him to rebel against God and by instigating him to seperate himself from God. In spite of that, however, with God’s help, man can resist Satan and remain faithful to God’ (MS, p.793).

The Devil, '…alive and active in our world’
Corrado Balducci…translated and adpated by Jordan Aumann, OP


#49

The serpent in the story was indeed described, particularly, as the serpent, the subtlest of all creatures. Putting the emphasis on the type of qualities found in the tempter.


#50

[quote=miguel delgado]guys: wormwood DOES NOT WANT to understand, if he wants to be the devil’s advocate let him be and just pray for him.
[/quote]


I do pray for him but be careful ho wy ou speak…Wormwood is my buddy! :thumbsup:


#51

Accutally I went to a black Mass before. The guy just told me it was a mass and left out the black satanic part. and I have to say that it wasn’t all that black. There was a lot a pink, flowers and french braiding hair :stuck_out_tongue: . Quite odd really. It was only till after I asked when we were going to read the scriptures and have the homily that things got ugly. So I took my Mother Mary Statue, My Crucifix and my copy of one of Father Coropri Shows from EWTN and left. :thumbsup: And I am happy to say I havn’t been back.O.K. there was that one time I went back with the Notre Dame Defense :irish2: but that was for something totally diffrent. :whistle:


#52

Funky:

[font=Verdana]if i ask Bob Clarke, L.Ac., an acupuncturist at the Open Gate Acupuncture & Herbal Medicine Clinic in Eugene, Oregon, he won’t say what you said.

I don’t know what to tell you other than, we could start a seperate thread about the effects of acupunture, but I have revived consciousness and stopped bleeding with acupunture, I have no reason to doubt the the other points work as specified. For more info you should contact someone alittle more reputable than just one L.Ac. Try the Beijing institue of medicine. Back on topic…

[/font]

[font=Verdana]and i never said, nor entertained the thought, that demons had anything to do with my condition, i’m not like the child in matt you refer to.

Only because you live in the time you do. If you had been born 2000 years ago, your condition would have been considered possession.

[/font]

[font=Verdana]when J cures blindness or lameness, He never tells them to leave. why then would He talk to the demons He drives out? and why would they, if they were also just illnesses, talk back to Him?

So you think that the gospels are ver batum?

miguel delgadoguys: wormwood DOES NOT WANT to understand, if he wants to be the devil’s advocate let him be and just pray for him.[/font]

I guess you are basing this on the fact that we have never interacted (to my knowledge) ? It is not that I don’t want to hear understand, I just don’t believe every speculation that comes out of peoples mouths. Would you have me just accept EVERYTHING I hear on these forums? If so, most of the information contradicts itself, so I still don’t know what opinion would make me more acceptable to you in this instance, not that it matters. I still contend that it seems silly to blame all of your faults on some etherial boogey man. Why not just admit that free will is the root of all evil?


#53

There must first exist the force of evil before it can become a real choice for free will.
Free will cannot choose some thing that doesnt exist–yet we know that evil exists in the world because people freely choose crime and corruption.
Your view seems to be that no matter what your eyes tell you about crime, and organized corruption, it is all easily explainable as a whole series of poor choices which are in any event morally relative since there is no boogyman and no evil.


#54

Beobab:

Forgive me for barging in, but the whole idea about Satan being the bad guy surely must have been rooted in Jewish Tradition, because otherwise it makes the statement in Matthew 9:34 by the Pharisees that Jesus is casting out demons by the power of the “Prince of Demons” meaningless.

Good point, but I don’t really know what to do with it :slight_smile:
Are you saying that the “morning star” is indeed a reference to Satan, and that he IS in the OT?

St. Shoshana:

[font=Comic Sans MS]You may not have met a priest perform an exorcism as of yet…and yet if you did, would you believe? Would you contact Fr Amorth, the chief exorcist in Rome?

[/font]
I guess so, you got an address for that, or a phone number or something? I’m not promising I’ll believe him but I’ll see what he has to say. You know that’s the best I can do.

[font=Comic Sans MS]Wormwood, you cannot believe my own words as witnessing one…it is not good enough for you.

Oh don’t be like that Shosh. It’s just that I know your are a person of some faith, so obviously you have a willingness to believe and that makes you biased. I would never call you a liar, but it is hard for me to take the testimonial of someone who had taken a side before the evidence. I am sure that you fully believe in what you are (were?) doing, I just remain skeptical having never experienced anything significantly supernatural firsthand.

[font=Comic Sans MS]If you saw a dead person come alive, it probably would not phase you (Jesus’ words).

It would depend on the level of decay (Wormwood’s words). :slight_smile:

[/font]

[font=Comic Sans MS]the objection that there is no mention of angels, as incorpereal beings at all in the book of Genesis, St Thomas Aquinas answers: 'The reason is that Moses was addressing uncultured people who could not understand incorporeal beings

. This is a fallacy that many people have today. Since the people of the past were less technologically developed, they must have been stupid. This seems to become popular after the dark ages, when people did actually seem to be in a state of intellectual decline. This is a strange view, especially coming from people that don’t believe in evolution. Answer this though, how did such backwards and unsophisticated people build the pyramids, or any of the other wonders of the ancient world? How did these simple people go from hunter-gatherers, to artisans, mathematicians, merchants, astronomers, masons, metal workers and smiths, and the first chroniclers of history, all in the blink of an eye from an evolutionary standpoint. They did all of this but the simple discipline of philosophy was out of their grasp? Or the simple use of their imagination?[/font]

[font=Comic Sans MS]'Although his malicious traits are more accentuated, the devil remains only a tempter who can facilitate for man the path of evil and rebellion, but he cannot destroy man’s freedom.

This is more the conclusion I came to as well. He does not seem to be a scapegoat or planner of all evil, but rather a side character. This direct opposition theory, that seems to be so popular, is more like zoroasterianism than monotheism.

[/font]

[font=Comic Sans MS]I do pray for him but be careful ho wy ou speak…Wormwood is my buddy! :thumbsup:

AWWWW shucks ;)[/font][/font]


#55

I Leatherman
Hey Wormwood, I saw the devil once or twice, I could draw you a picture,but I dont want to :eek: it is still quite clear in my mind after all these years . This was before I was in any sense religious minded, so what I saw was’nt influenced by religion or any particular interest in religion, I was something like you, tough to believe in something you can’t see. But what else can I say, there he was standing in front of me, hard to deny what you see, I had a good long look so as I said I could draw you a picture but not for any :eek: money…just watch yourself . Adios

No offense to you leatherman, but this is the type of testamonial I was talking about. Everybody’s got one, some vague story with more of a sense of evil than any actual details. This is not very convincing to say the least.

There must first exist the force of evil before it can become a real choice for free will.
Free will cannot choose some thing that doesnt exist–yet we know that evil exists in the world because people freely choose crime and corruption.

Hey try to convince Ghosty of this thing you call evil. We have an on-going argument on another thread with the premise that if God created EVERYTHING then he also created evil. Argue this point on “can God be surprised” i believe.

Your view seems to be that no matter what your eyes tell you about crime, and organized corruption, it is all easily explainable as a whole series of poor choices which are in any event morally relative since there is no boogyman and no evil.

Your meaning is lost on me I’m affraid. What my eyes tell me about crime is that it is all caused by people with varying degrees of desperation or psychosis. There is no supernatural force causing people to steal and kill each other. To say that it is the cosmic boogey man is just a way to not have to take the blame for your own actions. That is a horrible personality trait and I don’t want any part of it. I am willing to meet you half way and speculate that Satan may be the ultimate evil, but my mistakes and shortcomings are my own. Evil simply by presence can not rebuke freewill.


#56

[quote=Wormwood] I can’t find where Satan is pinned as the ultimate evil. At first he is chosen and second in heaven only to God. After he is banished from heaven, he appears a few more times, but never in the capacity I hear him spoken of now. :wink:
[/quote]

Wormwood, Satan is referred to several times in Scripture as “the evil one,” or as “the wicked one,” depending on one’s translation.

19 The seed sown on the path is the one who hears the word of the kingdom without understanding it, and the evil one comes and steals away what was sown in his heart. Matthew 13:19.

37 He said in reply, "He who sows good seed is the Son of Man, 38 the field is the world, the good seed the children of the kingdom. The weeds are the children of the evil one, 39 and the enemy who sows them is the devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the harvesters are angels. 40 Just as weeds are collected and burned (up) with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. Matthew 13:37-40.

13 I am writing to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I am writing to you, young men, because you have conquered the evil one. 1 John 2:13.

14 I write to you, children, because you know the Father. I write to you, fathers, because you know him who is from the beginning. I write to you, young men, because you are strong and the word of God remains in you, and you have conquered the evil one. 1 John 2:14.

11 For this is the message you have heard from the beginning: we should love one another, 12 unlike Cain who belonged to the evil one and slaughtered his brother. Why did he slaughter him? Because his own works were evil, and those of his brother righteous. 1 John 3:11-12.

18 We know that no one begotten by God sins; but the one begotten by God he protects, and the evil one cannot touch him. 1 John 5:18.

Those verses are pretty decisive. Satan destroys faith. Children of Satan, the evil one, will be bound up and thrown into fire. The evil one is to be conquered. Cain slaughtering his brother makes him one whol belongs to the evil one. The evil one can not touch one whom God protects.

It’s pretty clear. Satan is the Evil One, a bad guy.


#57

[quote=Wormwood]No offense to you leatherman, but this is the type of testamonial I was talking about. Everybody’s got one, some vague story with more of a sense of evil than any actual details. This is not very convincing to say the least.
[/quote]

This was a reply to your point, made earlier, that people somehow bring on experiences themselves by dwelling too much on the religious. I merely pointed out that that was not my experience.
The experience was unwelcome, unsought-after, and very real, details also if you wish, nothing vague about it.

You fall into the same trap as others I’m afraid, when God creates ‘everything’ you’re prepared to believe it absolutely and literally because it suits you’re view, but other things He did you will not accept with the same glee!

Freewill has to accept evil knowingly/willingly to come under its influence, and because of that knowing acceptance the person is held responsible, but evil can easily be rejected by an act of freewill.


#58

The truth is, Wormwood, it seems that you want to discuss Satan, a figure from a specific context, but don’t want to accept the necessary contextual references for the discussion of it. This is akin to those who roll their eyes at Catholics after the Catholics defend their faith during a Church-bashing discussion. That, to me, is just a more sophisticated form of the popular-culture logic, like the deeper levels of cliche.

As far as your medicinal history goes, whatever was being described as Shen, for instance, before, and is considered to be just some illness now is what you may call more understanding, but is in another light treated in the same way as Shen was back then. Basically, the names have changed but the underlying principals wouldn’t have. There is no way to argue around this from either side because both have to do with two positions that are completely contradictory: mine that spirits exist in we call that sickness, and yours that they don’t necessarily exist in what we call sickness (forgive my over-simplification). I believe the symptoms of modernism and materialism have infected Chinese medicine, and modern spirituality, as well as political-economics. This is not so outlandish as you said.

Anyway, this is not about Chinese medicine.

Time to stop casting pearls before swine. :thumbsup:

God bless,
Aaron


#59

Wormwood,

  You seem to have an answer/response for everything.  Your *responses* to *our *Posts are rooted in explaining everything in your own *earthly* way.  

  Your "foundation" will never be constructed.           

  Look to build your foundation on something else.   

Tony B.


#60

BibleReader

Wormwood, Satan is referred to several times in Scripture as “the evil one,” or as “the wicked one,” depending on one’s translation.

Thank you, but I was refering to OT. I realize that this tradition exists in christianity, I was looking for it’s origin. Also some of these verses like (19), could be read with a general context. That is “evil one” in a general sense for any evil one. But these are good verses and thank you.

I Leatherman
You fall into the same trap as others I’m afraid, when God creates ‘everything’ you’re prepared to believe it absolutely and literally because it suits you’re view,

So what other implied things were outside of God’s creation and how?

aaronjmagnan
The truth is, Wormwood, it seems that you want to discuss Satan, a figure from a specific context, but don’t want to accept the necessary contextual references

See that was the whole point. He is a contextual figure, but I wanted to know how and why he became so. For the best explaination I have gotten, it was because Christ revealed this fact. That is why this tradition persists in christianity but not in judaism. Explaination excepted, but then a new debate spawned about Satan causing all evil. I said that humanity, by virtue of free will was the root cause of evil behavior. Even by the NT biblical verses provided by BibleReader, Satan leads away from faith, not causes all evil. So if you are arguing by proxy that the lack of faith (caused by satan) is what causes evil, then how do you explain people of great faith commiting crimes?

As far as your medicinal history goes, whatever was being described as Shen, for instance, before, and is considered to be just some illness now is

Shen is a single aspect of the soul (one of four). It has to do with mental health and is still refered to as shen to this day. A shen disturbance is a general term used for several different emotional disorders.

and is considered to be just some illness now is what you may call more understanding, but is in another light treated in the same way as Shen was back then. Basically, the names have changed but the underlying principals wouldn’t have

In very simplistic terms, they moved from one set of definitions to another. Not to mention that “evil spirits” is representational term. When you have heart fire, your heart is not literally on fire. Anyway, the definitions shifted as their understanding shifted.An example would be, in one of the earliest books on acupunture it is thought that all diseases are caused by cold, then they realized that “heat” could also cause illness. This explained some phenomenon that didn’t fit into their perception of illness. Then later it was realized that phlegm and damp can also cause illness. This also altered perceptions, and answered some of the unexplainable emotional phenomenon. The treatments changed very little, but the theory and understanding changed and allowed for a stronger treatment ( peripheral treatment points).

Tony B.
Wormwood,

You seem to have an answer/response for everything.

Yeah I think I have gleaned all of the positive responses I am going to get with this one.

Your responses to *our *Posts are rooted in explaining everything in your own earthly way.

…The devil made me do it? :wink:
Seriously though, I can not deny the doubts that I have just to appease you guys. I wanted to get to the root reason for this tradition, or see if anyone even knew.

Your “foundation” will never be constructed.

Thanks for the vote of confidence.

Look to build your foundation on something else.

If your mentality is typical of your faith, perhaps I should.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.