mdarus

I estimate that I would benefit greatly from some palpable one-on-one. Then you have,
Maybe faith based on sight is not worthwhile.

Diogenes the Cynic

This is a rather specious connection in any case but even if Paul had been making a reference to Isaiah (doubtful) it still has no relevance to the authorial intent of Isaiah. There was no "Lucifer" in ancient Judaism - no concept of Satan as a "fallen angel." In the OT, Satan is not evil and is not a rebel. In context, the Isaiah passage explicitly identifies the King of Babylon as the subject of the taunt.

You can't use the New Testament to inform any reading of the Hebrew Bible in any case. The OT was written first, and written without awareness of the NT, of Christianity or of the way that Christians would reinterpret Jewish scripture. Paul himself was certainly not above distorting and misrepresenting the Hebrew Bible to fit his own theological agenda.

Viti

I have made that argument (what about the rebeliious angels?) before when someone used the "God can't reveal himself because that would violate our free will" and have always been completely ignored.

Viti

We picked up the idea from Christians. Many right here at II, do a search for free will discussions.

Many, many use the argument that if God revealed himself to all, and his existence was irrefutable, it would violate our free will. I have heard it 100 times. When you ask how the angels maintained freewill with full knowledge of God they have no answer.

mdarus

It is quite normative and consistent for Christians to interpret the Old Testament in light of the New Testament. We tend to value Paul's interpretation of the Old Testament and not view it as a distortion or misrepresentation. The intent of the author is an important hermeneutic principle but there are those cases where passages are insightful beyond the author's comprehension. If ancient Judaism failed to recognize Satan as evil, Christians would see the New Testament as correcting that mistake.

mdarus

When we try to answer the question, "Why doesn't God show himself?", the only way to answer it is with speculation. I am not sure we have a revelation of God's intention in Scripture but we might have an underlying discussion of the issue. The theme seems to be -- Even when God reveals himself in a physical, irrefutable way, it still results in short order to unbelief. I sense the answer is, "It doesn't work."

The other, less popular view is, "God is revealing himself all the time." In this view, the problem is that we are not sensitive to him. This is consistent with natural revelation in his creation. Some see God, others see rocks. It is the same information but different sensitivity to the message. Then there is the "still, small voice" method of communication that many hear but others do not.

I have no trouble believing that angels privileged with proof of God's existence would side with Satan in rebellion against him. Who said angels were smart?:Cheeky:

mdarus

That is a real possibility:


Heaven may be more interesting than we think. However, I don't agree with the premise that "seeing God" eliminates "free will." It certainly seems to change a lot of the dynamic and could answer a few questions, but the choice to love and trust will still be a choice. It's hard to imagine so it's hard to speculate. And that is all we have.

jakejonesiv

Lucifer is the morning star. Jesus is the morning star. Rev. 22:16.

Jake Jones IV

Hazy Daisy

Well, I'm glad to see you don't reject out of hand the possibility that people who go to heaven might sin after they get there and be thrown out. The vast majority of the Christians I've ever dealt with insist that sin does not and cannot occur in heaven.

I don't know of anyone who claims outright that seeing God eliminates free will. Usually they claim that seeing God changes people somehow, causing them to never sin again. Aside from the fact that this is a dubious claim (as the OP makes clear), it logically boils down to the elimination of free will for people who see God. The response I usually get when pointing this out is, to put it concisely, "Nuh-uhh!"

Speak for yourself. I have a little thing called reason, and when I find too many contradictions in a story that's supposed to be true, I reject its validity.

Viti

Huh? Why on Earth would you think people would maintain disbelief in the face of irrefutable knowledge? What do you mean "it doesn't work'?

In my hypothetical, I was thinking along the lines of every person simply being born with the knoweledge of God and some kind of constant communication to/from him...so there would be no question he exists.