The Narrow Path Ministries

I`ve heard Steve say a few times that there is no scriptural support for the commonly accepted idea that Satan was once good but fell from heaven through rebellion (Lucifer the fallen star thing). I am not sure that instead he positively advocates the idea that Satan was created as a tester, but it seems to be the logical alternative. If that were to be the case, could he help being anything other than he is? And if so, could therefore God in one sense be said to be indirectly the author of evil?
I have no doubt this has been asked before, because it`s the logical follow-on question, but punching in related search words only tells me that the words are "too common" to find anything.

I listened to Steve`s lecture The origin of Satan: http://www.thenarrowpath.com/mp3s/spi/spi02.mp3 and he tackles this very issue in the last quarter. He states that the devil is a tester or tempter but not an originator of evil per se. He merely induces people to do evil. But is not demon possession an evil act of aggression (with at least the partial objective of the harming of the possessee)?

While considering this, the question also arose in my mind: if the devil is only a tester, why are we encouraged to pray "lead us not into temptation?" I have never really understood that verse. Time for more digging I guess.

I guess these are mysteries though. I don`t expect or demand many or any answers here!

Hi Ian,

On the "lead us not..." petition, see http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 089#p45089

Oops, that`s embarassing. It was I who posed the question there! I think I`m one of those for whom something has to be repeated seven times before it sinks in. Well, at least that`s about my experience with learning the local language here.

That's okay, lots of questions get repeated on different threads. It's hard to keep track of everything that we have read here over the years.

I am not sure that instead he positively advocates the idea that Satan was created as a tester, but it seems to be the logical alternative. If that were to be the case, could he help being anything other than he is? And if so, could therefore God in one sense be said to be indirectly the author of evil?






If evil is necessary for us to experience in order to get to where God wants to go it's not sinful , it's a tool. "Knowing good and evil they have become like us" sounds to me like prophetic language as Paul said God speaks of things that are not yet as though they are. I think God meant us to experience evil to move from being babes to sons of God. Whether God actually created it or initiated the conditions (curses) to foster it is immaterial to me.

I am not real comfortable with the idea that God created Satan on purpose to test mankind. When I heard Steve talk about this a while back it was the first I had ever heard such a thing.

If God DID create Satan for this purpose, and Satan does the job that God assigned to him, then at the end of the age should not God tell him "well done, good and faithful servant" as opposed to tossing him in the Lake of Fire, which is apparently reserved for the devil and his angels? Could (or should) Satan have said, sorry God, I know you created me to test men but I just can't do that." Then what?

If I create a robot to bring me a roast beef sandwich every day at noon, I am not sure why I should be angry with it, or destroy it, if it follows my instructions. Of course I COULD do so because I created it, but something about it does'nt seem right.

TK

TK, why wouldn't you destroy something you created when you no longer need it? Why is anger the only reason to destroy something?

TK wrote:If God DID create Satan for this purpose, and Satan does the job that God assigned to him, then at the end of the age should not God tell him "well done, good and faithful servant" as opposed to tossing him in the Lake of Fire, which is apparently reserved for the devil and his angels?

I can think of at least 2 potential answers to your question

1) God created Satan as a tester, but he subsequently became corrupt in his role
2) The passage describing the demise of "Satan" is simply a symbolic way of saying that once eternity comes there will be no more testing

Michelle wrote:TK, why wouldn't you destroy something you created when you no longer need it? Why is anger the only reason to destroy something?

Well, I guess i wouldnt have a problem with destroying something i no longer needed. but the language in the Bible seems to suggest that God/Jesus is not happy with satan. in other words, it seems as if he is the adversary (which i think is the meaning of "satan") and not a "co-laborer" in their plan. If satan is just fulfilling his role, there seems to be a lot of animosity towards him despite this fact.

Matt's corruption idea is possible, I suppose. But that seems pretty close to the "traditional" view.

TK