There are other threads on questions involving freewill (and/or predestination), and the origin of Satan.

This question is only for Universalist and non-universalist Christians who believe in rebel spirits.

Most of us define God as the ground and source of all being.

And C.S. Lewis (a mere man) said “…there is a difficulty about disagreeing with God. He is the source from which all your reasoning power comes: you could not be right and He wrong any more than a stream can rise higher than it’s own source. When you are arguing against Him you are arguing against the very power that makes you able to argue at all: it is like cutting off the branch you are sitting on.”
(Mere Christianity, pg. 48.)

If this is the true definition of God, and Satan and his angels know Him as the ground and source of all being, wouldn’t they know that nothing they do could possibly thwart His purposes, and that all their efforts must end up serving His plan?

Why then would they bother fighting God, tempting men, planting false doctrines in the Church, planing and sceeming, etc.?

And doesn’t James 2:19 imply that they do in fact know that there is a Supreme Being who is the ground and source of all being?

**Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. **

If they know that, and they have even average human intelligence, wouldn’t they know that they’re wasting their time?

It’s hard to speculate about what angels may know. Certainly they don’t know as much as God or they’d be omniscient. Isn’t it possible they might be off in their own little “bubble” as many humans are? God keeps certain things from angels, even heavenly angels – such as the time of Jesus’ return. HE even kept this knowledge from Jesus Himself at least until His earthly sojourn as a mortal man was ended.

Hatred blinds people, even in the presence of clear facts. Why not angels? If a man can be consumed by hatred, how much more the rulers of the darkness of this age?

The story of the unjust steward might have an application here. The steward had been wasting the master’s substance. When the master found out about his profligance, he determined to dismiss the steward. Word of this reached the steward’s ears, and his response was to call in the master’s debtors and significantly write down their debts so that when his stewardship ended, he would be received into others’ houses. The master commended his steward because of his shrewdness. What did this man do, though? He ingratiated himself with the master’s debtors (who would have been local villagers) by offering them great generosity on behalf of the master. The master would have lived in the village too, though probably in rather more style than his fellows. He was probably interviewing his steward regarding said generosity even as the sounds of the celebration over that generosity drifted around them in the evening air. The steward had placed his trust in the master’s kindness, in his unwillingness to disappoint his fellow villagers who were so overjoyed at his benevolence in writing off so much of their debt. He trusted his master also to show kindness to him, and that was why he had risked doing such a thing. He still had to find a new job, but he could find it among the villagers (where he would be closely watched – as the rogue he was) but not destitute and not badly treated.

The steward was commended because he knew and trusted the master’s character. It was on that character he gambled when he wrote off those debts, and he was not disappointed. If Satan had anything resembling the understanding of this steward, he would know better than to keep up his desperate battle against insurmountable forces. But he hasn’t the sense of the steward. He thinks his situation, which he probably entered into in the throes of unmitigated self-adulation, is now hopeless. There’s no point to let off the battle now because he “knows” what’s waiting for him at the end. He has NO trust in the Father’s character or in His love. Whatever suggestions of that may reach into the dense thickets of his tortured mind are bitterly dismissed as foolish weak imaginations.

Or that’s the way I see it anyway for what it’s worth.

Love, Cindy

I’ve occasionally pondered if the human tradjedy (paradise, evil age, paradise) is meant to reveal to all of creation, especially fallen angels, that love is greater than hate, light than darkness, self-sacrifice than selfishness.

I think you might just have something there, Sherman!

Michael,

This is an interesting question. I think the answer lies in the fact that the type of knowledge self-conscious beings were given when they were first created - and the type necessary for them to have free will and to become themselves perfected - was such that it did not determine their physical acts.

In other words, we can imagine unfallen Adam and Eve never having a proclivity or natural desire to sin. However, their knowledge of not eating of the fruit was not such that made it impossible for them to desire that. Truly moral acts, for them to be significant, must be such that the intellect does not determine the will, else we have no freedom and we ourselves are not actual causes of anything morally significant. Milton says somewhere, what would be the good in abstaining from the fruit if it was “necessity”, rather than the person of Adam or Eve, which compelled them? So the amount of intelligence is totally irrelevant to the moral aspect of the question. Whatever Satan knew, he did not know it in such a way that made it impossible for him to desire otherwise or for his will to reach out towards whatever lesser good he should not have reached out for.

It all revolves around the concept of epistemic distance and the “space” which is necessary for us to become, ourselves, perfected and like God. No doubt the more god-like we grow, the less and less we see and/or desire lesser goods, but at each “step” in that process there are newer temptations that we may possibly misconstrue and twist to fulfill our own desires. Until at least, we have finally overcome them all and actually BECAME good.

But, as MacDonald said, Alas - the distance from the light!

I’d have to ask one to be sure; and even then I might not be sure (since a rebel spirit might not be the most honestly self-critical evaluator of his/her/its own motives. )

In my novels I take an educated guess that they’ve mistaken mere power to cause effects as the most fundamentally important thing in reality (which is an easy mistake to make) and consequently they infer that any rebellion against ultimate authority at all is demonstrable proof that the authority isn’t fundamental reality after all – because mere power would prevent or stop rebellion immediately.

This works out in various plot-related ways I don’t want to go into because that would be story spoilers; and after all I’m only making an educated guess and checking out how that works through a fictional means. But if rebel spirits exist I do expect something like this is why they think they can win: if they had that level of power they wouldn’t let others like themselves go around rebelling against them, ergo q.e.d. etc.

That seems logical.
They must believe they can win, and that perhaps they’ve even PROVED that they can, because God just lies down and lets them do it (despite promises of an end to their tricks).

Or maybe they believe it’s better to be a lion for a day than a lamb for eternity.

Either way they’re incorrect…love fundamentally wins no matter what occurs…and lambs for eternity? i am sure it’s more complicated than that…

Thank you Jason.

But doesn’t James 2:19 contradict that idea?

I mean (if I understand you correctly) aren’t you suggesting that rebel spirits don’t really believe that God is the fundamental reality?

If that’s true, why would James say “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble”?

Doesn’t that kinda imply that they know (as well as you, or C.S. Lewis, or any man) that there’s one Independent Fact, Ultimate Authority, or Fundamental Reality?

That’s the part I’m having trouble understanding.

How can they know that, and still rebel, and think they can win?

They may think they have a chance, however that doesn’t make their enemy any less terrifying!!!

How can they think they have a chance if they recognize their enemy as the one God (i.e. the Fundamental Reality that gives them their existence, reasoning ability, and idependence, who created time and knows the end from the beginning, and who will always be one step ahead of them)?

How can they think they have a chance if what James says in James 2:19 is true?

Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble

Aquinas viewed angels as purely spiritual beings, and believed that once they’ve made moral choices their wills are so set that they cannot change.

That might make sense if you believe in ET, but what if you believe in UR?

Jason’s suggestion makes some sense, but seems to contradict James 2:19 (by suggesting that rebel spirits don’t really believe in one God, i.e. one Fundamental Reality.)

I don’t see an answer to this question right now, and I’d be interested in more comments.

Thank you.

I didn’t get a contradiction from what he said. My take on it was that they know Who gave them life, and are of course terrified, but they believe that His power can’t be infinite if He allows them to just rebel and doesn’t squash them instantly. This shows a lack of understanding on their part. They don’t realise that their rebellion is part of the grand scheme, and that they have no hope at all to defeat love, because Love is as inevitable as the tide. However, they don’t see love at all…and certainly don’t understand its subversive power that is even now eroding their high places.
…assuming they actually exist as personal beings, that is

Do you not believe God exists, even when you sin?

I have a response further upthread which I think really gets to the core of your question.

To Christians and Jews, the word “God” has always signified the One Independent Fact, Fundamental Reality, or Ground and Source of all being.

Aren’t you suggesting that rebel spirits don’t believe in such a God, and doesn’t that contradict James 2:19?

Evidently, i would suggest that (if they exist, which i don’t actually believe…but for the sake of argument) they believe they have OTHER knowledge than we do, that power is all there is, and that God, as strong as He is can be beaten, because He has already demonstrated a vulnerability in not crushing their rebellion to begin with.
i would think they tremble because of self doubt, the way any of us might do if we knew we were doing wrong…even if we thought we could get away with it.

I sometimes doubt the existence of angels, demons, and a God or gods.

I’ve also spoken to a lot of Mormons who believe in angels, demons, and gods, but who don’t seem to believe in any One Independent Fact, Fundamental Reality, or Ground and Source of all being.

But we’re all just men.

What is James 2:19 telling us about what demons know or believe?

Do they know that there’s One God, and that He’s the Ground and Source of all being, and that (in the end) He must be right and they must be wrong, He must win and they must lose?

Or do they know little more than you and I, and the Mormons down the street?

And if they do know there’s one God (whose the ground and source of all being), why would they waste their time opposing what He’s trying to do in the lives of individuals with the kind of machinations depicted in the screwtape letters?

I read that.

But how does your view differs from that of Aquinas?

Do you believe in UR?

Can these rebel spirits change?

I don’t know exactly what James meant. But I can certainly draw a parallel here. Why do you think it possible for you to know that God exists and yet still sin against him but angels cannot?

I’m not sure what you mean by Aquinas’ view. I’m saying that you’re begging the question of determinism by implying that the type of knowledge angels have of God is such that it makes it impossible for them to sin. But suppose they did not have this sort of knowledge? If we have free will, we must have a kind of knowledge that does not determine us to be good. Hence our intellects do not determine our wills, and so the whole idea about having a certain IQ and sinning is beside the point.

Where did I say I know that God exists?

I know Mormons who say that God has somehow reached down into their brains and given them the personal knowledge that He exists, but to them He’s an exalted man, and part of some Fundamental Reality (if there is such a thing.)

He’s not the Ground and Source of all being (which is what I’ve always taken “God” to be, and what I take James to mean.)

As a mortal man, can you honestly say you know there’s a God, even when you sin (or even when you don’t)?

As I said, Aquinas viewed angels as purely spiritual beings, and as such he believed that they weren’t subject to change in the same way we are.

He believed that once they made moral choices (as the fallen angels, and the angels who remained faithful did) their wills were set and they couldn’t change.

No, I can’t say that I know that. But I can say I have sinned while simultaneously mentally affirming the existence of God or a higher power. Indeed I believe having such an awareness is necessary for the act of sin to occur.

But I’m not sure you can take the one sentence from James and go on to argue that the angels had the type of knowledge which would make sinning impossible. In fact, if you take him as inspired, they must not have had that kind of knowledge. Who can say in what sense and how strictly he was using the word “know” anyway?

Actually, he used the word “believe,” but is that important?

Do you think fallen angels doubt that God is The Fundamental Reality we take Him to be?

I don’t know. But I can imagine the more one freely chooses to turn away from the good, the more one creates for himself a false notion of reality. I can well imagine that, through doing evil acts, their minds are darkened such that they may have all sorts of wrong notions about God (e.g. perhaps he exists but he cannot stop me, perhaps he is not good, perhaps I can defeat him, etc.)