Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Inability of Satan and his angels to repent?


  • Please log in to reply
43 replies to this topic

#21 Matthew Namee

Matthew Namee

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 152 posts

Posted 25 February 2008 - 03:26 PM

With regard to the question of immateriality and changeableness, if angels being immaterial are somehow "fixed" in their dispositions, how then does one account for the fall of some of them in the first place?

This is the question which always bothered me, and I don't know the answer. I do think it is important to remember that angels are "immaterial" only relative to us humans. They are still "material" when compared to God. They are not omnipresent, meaning they are bound to a certain degree by space (as is evidenced, for example, in the Book of Daniel). I think the best attempt to describe the physical nature of the angels is actually in a work of fiction, Out of the Silent Planet by C.S. Lewis (the first book of the Space Trilogy). I know this isn't Orthodox, etc., etc., but he basically describes these beings as having bodies far more subtle than human bodies, so much so that relative to us they are "spiritual." Nevertheless, they are in fact material. I think this is consistent with the Orthodox understanding, as only God is "pure spirit."

As for the repentance of the fallen angels, I think it is a subject best left alone. They are so, so different from humans. They are not just "bodiless spirits"; they are another sort of being entirely. We're talking about non-human sin and repentance. I'm content to say, "I have no idea," and leave it to God. Though I know that's a cop-out in this context, since it's not an answer at all.

#22 Fr Raphael Vereshack

Fr Raphael Vereshack

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 4,420 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member
  • Verified Monastic Cleric

Posted 25 February 2008 - 03:54 PM

The above comments are quite correct. St John of Damascus makes the point that when we speak of the immaterial powers we do not mean this immateriality in the sense of God's immateriality. Rather we mean it in a relative sense as being created and of having substance although being much more refined than our material nature is.

As already point out on the Forum, for the Fathers, the inability of the bodiless powers to repent is connected to their immaterial nature. This does not mean that they are absolutely unchangable in nature but it does mean that the focus of their desire & will is much more static -even if it is on something evil- than ours is.

This I think gives us a glimpse that even though instability is a reflection of falleness, change in itself also reflects a deeper dynamic of creation which man chiefly reflects as a faculty of free choice. Through free choice man relates to the God given & essential dynamic of the universe in a way other creatures cannot do or perceive. Although it can be turned to the worse it is through this faculty that man is shown to be God-created.

So we see then how man stands uniquely as microcosm created to redeem the universe through the grace of Christ through the power of free choice.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

Edited by Fr Raphael Vereshack, 25 February 2008 - 03:54 PM.
no need for quote of post above


#23 Kornelius

Kornelius

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 53 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 25 February 2008 - 05:33 PM

Well this is part of what is in question since a previous poster quoted St. John of Damascus on just this point. My comments were a speculation predicated provisionally on the truth of St. John's statements...or at least his statements as presented and interpreted by the poster.


I am not sure that we are getting the same message from St. John Damaskinos. In Book 2 of the Orthodox Faith, St. John makes it clear that there is nothing unchangeable in their disposition. He says:

"So the angel, is of a nature which is rational, intelligent, free, and variable in judgment, that is, subject to voluntary change. It is only the Uncreated which is unchangeable." Emphasis is mine


In other words, if the fallen angels want to repent, there is nothing in their nature that can prevent them. As the saint says, their nature is subject to voluntary change. Hence, their incorporeity does not affect their return or their repentance; what prevents them is their choice stemming from pride.

If we accept such tenet, however, we might as well assume that the holy angels after the angelic fall, are still subject to voluntary change, i.e., they may choose evil too. While that is true, we know that due to their decision and stedfastness to God at the moment of fall, they received from God a unique grace, a consolidation in the good, that makes them infallible in the ages to come. (To my knowledge this unique grace is not mentioned by St. John of Damascus in The Orthodox Faith).

While St. John speaks of angelic nature as subject to voluntary change, further down in his book he compares - in what seems at first glance to be a contradiction - the fall of angels to what death is to men. He says:

"One should note that the fall is to the angels just what death is to men. For, just as there is no repentance for men after their death, so is there none for the angels after their fall."


In order to reconcile this "contradiction" one must realize that St. John is speaking rather prophetically about the destiny of the fallen angels. In their hypostasized nature they will always until the Second Coming, have the opportunity to repent. They could potentially use their ability of voluntary change at any time, if they want to. God is Infinitely Merciful and will receive everyone one with open arms. The Devil, however, out of free choice has embraced a second nature, not the full, hypostasized one given to him by God; and the fathers of the church prophetically know his ultimate choice. Again, he is doomed not by nature, but by choice. Our God is a Just God, and He would never create something that intrinsically lacks the ability (in our case due to incorporeity) for redemption.

I mentioned in my previous post that there are fathers of the church who believe that angels being spirits (although not purely spiritual as God) have an advantage in understanding spiritual virtues, whereas others believe that Man has the advantage for reasons I listed above.

Certainly, according to many holy fathers, Man still has a more privileged position overall, for God became human not angel, and He will sit on His throne in eternity having both the divine and human nature. Furthermore, angels were created to be ruled by the Creator, whereas Man was created to rule over the creation.


There is truth in both, but since in this thread the focus is more on the advatages of corporeity, I would like to say that it is true that having a corporeal body can be very beneficial. Every physical pain, illness or affliction does provide a softening of the soul, a spiritual awakening which prepares a background for repentance, something the angels can't experince in similar terms. Nonetheless, angels may commune with God through fascinating spiritual levels, due to their nature.

Originally posted by Robert Hegwood.
As for believing in a fallen angel needing to "possess" (with permission) someone in order to effect its own repentance...I do not believe this, but I have wondered about it especially in the light of what St. John says about repentance and incorporality and in light of the naked fact that in certain circumstances both men and beasts may be possess and wonder what this "capacity" both to possess or be possessed is. Granted when evil spirits are involved it is something perverse...but a thing perverted is only something created good put to an improper use....which raises the question what is the "right use" of the ability...why does it exist at all?


Dwelling happens in both case of good and evil angels, however, holy angels dwell only in good souls, whereas evil ones dwells only in evil souls.

In Book 2 of his The Experience of God - Orthodox Dogmatic Theology, Dumitru Staniloae explains clearly:

"If it is true that good angels can dwell permanently in bodies kept under control and particularly in good souls with their pure minds, then evil spirits are even more solidly at home in bodies ravaged by impulses of the passions both in the lower parts and also in minds that are framing malign thoughts."


Edited by Kornelius, 25 February 2008 - 05:58 PM.


#24 M.C. Steenberg

M.C. Steenberg

    Former Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,843 posts

Posted 25 February 2008 - 08:01 PM

Dear Kornelius,

I rather suspect you're attempting to forge too definitive a dichotomy between materiality either wholly affecting an ability to change, or not affecting it at all. Given such a dichotomy, quotations from the fathers could be used to support either.

In reality, the patristic heritage seems to speak in somewhat less definitive terms. Clearly the incorporeality of the angels (which, as has been rightly noted, is not the same as the utter incorporeality of God; but which is a genuine incorporeality all the same) does not mean they have no ability to change at all; were this the case, then Robert's good question would have no possible answer. On the other hand, it is not right to say that incorporeality has nothing to do with mutability, and thus the hazards of sin and possibilities of repentance. Numerous fathers speak directly to this (I mentioned a bit earlier Irenaeus of Lyons, who discusses it explicitly).

One thing that I am fairly certain about (though always open to being pointed towards patristic texts to challenge it) is that the fathers don't generally speak in terms of the distinction between humanity's changeability (vis-a-vis repentance) and the angels' stability (either in sin or in holiness) residing in a specific type of test given them, which has been posited in this thread. I should be very grateful for any patristic evidence to support this kind of thought.

Back to the matter at hand, the relationship of materiality to change shouldn't be reduced simply to the question of repentance / non-repentance. In other words, it's not only a question of an ability to repent. Patristic commentary on the question focuses more holistically on the whole nature of beings: humanity, in its materiality, is deeply influenced by the mutability of material created nature (in a way that angels are not, given that they, whilst still created, are not material). This means that humanity's experience of life -- including temptations, responses to temptations, and movements towards repentance -- are bound up in what many fathers call the 'inherent instability' of material nature. An angel, by terms of many of the same fathers, is not bound up in the same type of instability (though it has challenges of its own), and this is the distinction forged between the categories.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

#25 Darren

Darren

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 203 posts

Posted 25 February 2008 - 11:50 PM

Dwelling happens in both case of good and evil angels, however, holy angels dwell only in good souls, whereas evil ones dwells only in evil souls.


That is not the impression i got from the quote you posted, granted people ravaged by impulses might be easier for for a demon to possess, but people who may be struggling with certain impulses are not neccesarily evil souls.

#26 Victor Mihailoff

Victor Mihailoff

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 02 March 2008 - 05:43 AM

[quote name='Robert Hegwood']With regard to the question of immateriality and changeableness, if angels being immaterial are somehow "fixed" in their dispositions, how then does one account for the fall of some of them in the first place?

Their position is fixed but it was not so before the angelic fall. God fixed their positions after the angelic war was fought; demons remain demons and angels remain angels much like if you complete a final exam and some students fail while others graduate. People can repeat a course or re-sit an exam but God knows the inner workings of all His creatures.

God knows the demons through pride, are set in their ways and hate Him more than they resented Him before their fall, whereas the angels passed their test and are permanently deserving of their reward as humans too will be if they pass the test of faith in their lives and acquire citizenship in heaven. The angels love God more now than before the angelic fall seeing God has revealed more of Himself, His beauty, His love for His creatures, His virtues, His kindness and generosity etc., since the fall.

#27 Victor Mihailoff

Victor Mihailoff

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 81 posts

Posted 02 March 2008 - 07:09 AM

First of all my friend, incorporeity or lack thereof have nothing to do with repentance. Whether one has a corporal or incorporal existence, repentance is independant of either one, for it belongs to the spiritual realm, which brings us to the realization that we humans are indeed at a disadvatage vis-a-vis angels, for they are not bound to visible symbols in knowing God and participating in Him.


Demons enjoy passions through human experiences of them. Demons can possess some humans and entice them to sin and can stay close to humans when they sin to get their high from the human high. Much like when a tuning fork is placed next to another and the one is struck to produce a note, then the other also vibrates.

When demons possess a person and entice him to, for example, drink huge quantities of alcoholic beverage, the demon enjoys the drunken state but withdraws from the human when the hangover arrives. The demon returns when the human feels better and again entices him to drink. So the human suffers for his transgression in this life through his physical body but the demon avoids suffering for sin until after the judgement day. Suffering encourages repentance. The human body is the means to human suffering. So, yes, repentance is tied in with corporeality.

About 26 or 27 years ago I read a newspaper story about two young brothers who killed an elderly woman next door. The woman was in her 80s and bedridden with illness. A good Samaritan neighbour visited her daily to tend to her needs. She left the front door open so the old woman could call out if she needed something.

Two little brothers next door came into her house and bashed her head in with a brick. She died. The boys were something like four and three years old and no doubt watched cartoons in which one character hits another on the head with a brick. Then a lump forms and pretty little birds sing and circle the lump. A minute later the victim is back on his feet and running away.

Those boys received no punishment from the law because they were below the age of responsible reason. They did not really know what they were doing. If they were thirty years older, they would have felt the full weight of the law. The authorities did not record a charge against the boys and the parents were advised to never tell them what they did when they get older. The boys had time to change their ways and were not yet mature enough to be fully responsible for their actions.

Humans on earth are not yet matured to what they can be in heaven. Angels, on the other hand are very intelligent beings who have a mature knowledge of good and evil. They dwell in the presence of the Most High God. We turn away from God in our lives a number of times and then can learn that this is wrong through the suffering that follows our actions. Demons turned away from God once as angels with much greater intelligence, wisdom and knowledge than we have as physical, corruptible creatures. They were in the presence of God and chose not to be.

We often ignorantly separate ourselves from God as did Adam and Eve, and then the suffering comes after which we can feel the need to repent. After repenting, we can return to God. Fallen angels on the other hand, knowingly turned away from God, turned to man and began leading him down the same path as an act of revenge against God and an act of jealousy towards man. Repent? The fallen angels have not begun to end their sinning. They are heading deeper and deeper into hell fire knowingly. Their evil character is such that they no longer want God near them at all. They hate Him and us. We can wake up to ourselves, mature in a good way and approach God. They cannot. Just like a falling stone cannot of itself change course and rise again to its former state of rest on a table, so too the demons cannot repent of there own free will. They have acquired momentum in their never ending fall. They have not yet stopped falling. We fall a little and get back up again, they're still falling profoundly.

The demons will begin their real suffering in hell. remember Legion in the bible? Those thousands of demons in that poor possessed man feared that Christ would send them to hell (hades, the deep) before their time. They loved sinning so much within a physical body of flesh (for they have not one of their own) that they would rather enter the bodies of pigs than go to hell before the time.

The fact that demons cannot repent, is not a matter of God's witholding permission from them. They cannot repent because of what they have allowed themselves to become. There are people who cannot repent also. "I say unto you, every sin and blasphemy will be forgiven of men, but the blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven men. Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man, it will be forgiven him, but whoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, either in this age or the age to come" Matt. 12:31,32. This blasphemy is willful hardness of heart. It attributes the saving action of the Spitit to Satan and refuses to accept God's forgiveness and mercy. (Pg 35, "The Orthodox Study Bible - New testament and Psalms". That's why demons can't repent and why even some humans can't repent, they have become demon like in their relationship with God.

You see, the angels already had God with them abundantly in heaven and they chose to be without Him. If a person sins against the Holy Spirit, that person already had God abundantly in their life and chose to be cast himself away from Him, like the fallen angels did. Whereas, the 'fallen - human - nature - man and woman' was simply seduced by the devil and foolishly tried out his advice before having knowledge of evil. For that knowledge came with the transgression of eating the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, which came after and was the fulfillment of Satan's advice. That kind of person can repent after sufferring and then regretting their sin, return humbly to God asking His forgiveness. Most people with their bodies can repent; all bodiless demons cannot.

#28 Rdr Andreas

Rdr Andreas

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 03 March 2008 - 02:07 AM

According to St Anatoly of Optina, the devil and his demons cannot repent because they are too proud to ask for forgiveness. Just as there must be both offer and acceptance to make a contract, so forgiveness, which God freely offers to all, can only have effect if it is accepted in repentantance. The devil and the demons are so hardened in pride that they cannot have that repentance which would enable them to accept God's forgiveness. God preserve us from allowing our hearts to become so hardened by sin that we go a sin too far, as St Theophan the Recluse suggests, and we forfeit the grace of repentance.

#29 M.C. Steenberg

M.C. Steenberg

    Former Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,843 posts

Posted 03 March 2008 - 09:02 AM

A few of the more recent posts in this thread seem to have been made without having read the discussion above, as they simply restate early points with no note of the discussion that's been taking place around them.

#30 M. Partyka

M. Partyka

    Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 345 posts

Posted 27 April 2008 - 06:31 AM

Just wanted to throw in a couple more statements from St. John of Damascus that I haven't seen mentioned yet:

With difficulty [the angels] are moved to evil, yet they are not absolutely immoveable: but now they are altogether immoveable, not by nature but by grace and by their nearness to the Only Good....


For through his incorruption the devil, when he had fallen as the result of his own free choice, was firmly established in wickedness, so that there was no room for repentance and no hope of change: just as, moreover, the angels also, when they had made free choice of virtue became through grace immoveably rooted in goodness.


Edited by M. Partyka, 27 April 2008 - 08:26 PM.
Added another quote


#31 Kusanagi

Kusanagi

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 716 posts

Posted 09 January 2009 - 05:15 PM

Just wanted to add this story that I came across recently from Fr Cleopa.

At a women's monastery in Romania, one nun had the job of ringing the bells to notify the other sisters when to pray. Now there was a demon which would interfere by ringing the bells out of the scheduled times. The abbess and the other sisters would become angry with the nun responsible for ringing the bells. But the nun never said its wasn't me or anything but she took it all with humility. She decided to one night to make an investigation to see which sister was ringing the bells before the appointed times. She waited and found it was a demon ringing the bell, she saw the demon standing by the window with one foot in the bell tower and one on the edge of the window. The nun cried out "By the Power of Christ you are bound!" The demon froze on the spot. the nun went and called the abbess and the council of nuns first and then later the rest of the nuns. They were all horrified to see a demon there and was scared. The demon of course wanted to be released but the nun that bound her said I will let you go on one condition that you chant Holy God, Holy Mighty, Holy Immortal like you used to do before the fall. The demon replied that it was impossible to chant such a song without them melting. The nun said thats fine we can melt but you are not allowed to leave without chanting that first or do I have to burn you with the Power of the Cross? The demon gave way and chanted the hymn and all the nuns were crying as it was very beautiful. At that moment the demon became an angel of light and ascended into heaven.

#32 Ryan

Ryan

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 837 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 01 May 2012 - 02:37 AM

One of Satan's monologues from Paradise Lost:

Me miserable! which way shall I flie
Infinite wrauth, and infinite despaire?
Which way I flie is Hell; my self am Hell;
And in the lowest deep a lower deep
Still threatning to devour me opens wide,
To which the Hell I suffer seems a Heav'n.
O then at last relent: is there no place
Left for Repentance, none for Pardon left?
None left but by submission; and that word
Disdain forbids me, and my dread of shame
Among the Spirits beneath, whom I seduc'd
With other promises and other vaunts
Then to submit, boasting I could subdue
Th' Omnipotent. Ay me, they little know
How dearly I abide that boast so vaine,
Under what torments inwardly I groane:
While they adore me on the Throne of Hell,
With Diadem and Sceptre high advanc'd
The lower still I fall, onely Supream
In miserie; such joy Ambition findes.
But say I could repent and could obtaine
By Act of Grace my former state; how soon
Would higth recall high thoughts, how soon unsay
What feign'd submission swore: ease would recant
Vows made in pain, as violent and void.
For never can true reconcilement grow
Where wounds of deadly hate have peirc'd so deep:
Which would but lead me to a worse relapse
And heavier fall: so should I purchase deare
Short intermission bought with double smart.
This knows my punisher; therefore as farr
From granting hee, as I from begging peace:
All hope excluded thus, behold in stead
Of us out-cast, exil'd, his new delight,
Mankind created, and for him this World.
So farewel Hope, and with Hope farewel Fear,
Farewel Remorse: all Good to me is lost;
Evil be thou my Good; by thee at least
Divided Empire with Heav'ns King I hold
By thee, and more then half perhaps will reigne;
As Man ere long, and this new World shall know.



#33 AnthonyKana

AnthonyKana

    Junior Poster

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 18 December 2012 - 11:45 AM

I have a question regarding the devil and his demons before the fall, did they know the Godhead as per we do i:e. Father, Son and Holy Spirit - One God ?

#34 Owen Jones

Owen Jones

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,341 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 19 December 2012 - 02:17 PM

I believe what is being discussed is what we might term speculative theology, subject to various theologumenae, as opposed to the dogma of the Church Councils regarding, for example, the doctrine of the Trinity, or the Incarnation. That allows for differences of holy opinions on the subject. Theologumenae, rightly understood, do not really apply to all opinions, as if our opinions are all equally valid. They refer to the theological opinions of holy men which in some cases appear to us to be utterly contradictory, but still have validity in their own right. So the Church gives us the liberty to side with one or the other, as long as we recognize that there are other opinions on the subject --- in short, it must not be a prideful opinion but rather something that provides some spiritual benefit. We see this in some of the writings of the Desert Fathers. A monk will write that Abba so and say says this, on the other hand, Abba so and so puts it this way...

#35 Lakis Papas

Lakis Papas

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 19 December 2012 - 11:27 PM

Water is a specific molecular structure. Under certain circumstances it takes the form of liquid, or solid, or gas. It has the natural freedom to change form, nevertheless remains water in all forms.

Logical beings (angels, humans) have the ability to change not according to formalism but according to ontology. That is, Adam after the fall suffered an ontological change but he maintained his identity - he remained Adam. Satan after his fall suffered an ontological change but he maintained his identity - he remained the same being that was initially.

Here is the paradox: while Adam was composite by nature so

#36 Lakis Papas

Lakis Papas

    Regular Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 20 December 2012 - 02:21 PM

....

Here is the paradox: while Adam was created composite in nature and alternation was compatible with his intrinsic ontological dynamics, Satan was not create composite in nature and alternation was not compatible with his intrinsic ontological dynamics. It is a paradox that Satan fell in the first place! He initially was an angel with a simple nature with no composition. An ontological alternation of such an angel should suggest that a change into a new being should occur - something that did not happen. Thus, Church Fathers proposed that angelic nature should be composite in a peculiar way - then ontological change is compatible with identity preservation.

St Gregory the Theologian says :

I, however, for I confess myself to be a man,--that is to say, an animal shifty and of a changeable nature,--both eagerly receive this Baptism, and worship Him Who has given it me, and impart it to others; ...


Repentance is not enough to restore the ontological consequence of apostasy (that is made clear in the essay "On the Incarnation", by St Athanasius the Great). God provides the restoration - in case of humans, restoration is provided in Christ. But repentance is required, because logical beings have the God given privilege to be self-identified.

After the apostacy, Satan and daemons and angels are ontologically different (Satan as the instigator of apostacy, daemons as apostates, and angels as non-apostates). They all came to new ontological statuses. These new statuses are also substantially different from the state of humans. The nature of angels has been consolidated to good. The nature of Satan and daemons have been consolidated to evil. The ontological transformation had the effect for the angels to solidify the underlying rationale component of their nature, while for the Satan/daemons had the effect το discredit the underlying rationale component of their nature. These ontological aftereffects were embedded in the identities of angels and daemons respectively.

So, today, when we ask "can a human repent?", is like asking "can a human be transformed and yet preserve his/her original identity ?" and the answer is yes (today, John can repent while preserving the identity of John). But, when we ask this question for Satan (or asking for angels today to follow Satan), the answer is no (today, Satan can not repent while preserving his identity). Today, Satan is evil, he is not just doing evil. Today, any particular angel is good, he is not just doing good. Prior to apostacy angels were put in a God-given state as they were created, after apostasy they claimed a new state (daemons as apostates and angels as non-apostates) - these new states are not typological transforms of being. They are essential alterations that produce beings as self-identified.

In case of Adam the fall had a similar aftereffect, he acquired a new identity being self-identified as apostate. But God in His merciful Wisdom introduced a new way of being for humans, that they would be with an end and not live forever(Genesis 3:22):

"Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever" - therefore the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden to till the ground from which he was taken. So He drove out the man; and He placed cherubim at the east of the garden of Eden, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to guard the way to the tree of life.”

Then, the evil that man acquired in human identity was eliminated by death and when Christ took flesh became a God-man and then died as a man (although he had no need to die being sinless) and then resurrected, He restored the identity of man free of any evil aftereffects. (1 Corinthians 15:20-23):

"Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming".


So what was already happened for the angels and daemons, it will happen also for humans after the second coming of Christ. That is, all logical creatures will finally acquire permanent self-identified identities.

Edited by Lakis Papas, 20 December 2012 - 02:46 PM.


#37 nijjhar

nijjhar

    Junior Poster

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts

Posted 28 December 2012 - 01:08 AM

Hi Brethren, It is good to know what you are talking about. This is Age when we are toworship God from whom the Rabbis kept us alienated. When the Rabbis had becomedry of the Light of our Father that is mercy and had become hypocrites to earntheir living, then our Father sends His very Son to show us the Light of ourFather. The once-born are shown through Merciful Deeds of our Father such ascuring the sick on Sabbath, a Special Day devoted to the works of God when youdo not charge money otherwise it will not be different from the other secular days.But the Rabbis themselves being Dry of the Spirit of God objected to such worksby Christ Jesus.
To the Twice-born, the Light was introduced through the Word of our Father, HisWord, so that they can explain both the moral and the spiritual puzzles to thetwice-born people. The standards of Apostles were the same as that of ChristJesus and at Pentecost, the Twelve Labourers, Matthias being promoted from the70 outer circle Labourers that were being prepared for John, the Baptist topave the way for the inner 12 Labourers, who were Paid their Wage of HolySpirit at Pentecost. Once-born Peter was extremely happy and He started toPreach Gospel straight away. Peter was also the First Apostle to deliver thefirst sermon about the Kingdom of Heaven in which truth counts so that people buildtheir Houses on solid rocks and not on sands as Annias and Saphira had done.Then, the other Apostles would Preach Gospel to introduce to them the RoyalKingdom of God that is inherited by the Sons of God, the Most High. SlaveDisciples cannot enter into this Royal Kingdom meant for the solitary as theGate is Narrow and you have to find it by the grace of our Father.

Opposite to God is Satan who produces mountains of spiritually blind fanaticDisciple sons for his evil jobs as the Satanic Temple High Priest told hisfaithful dogs to tear Angel Stephen to pieces for mentioning the name ofAbraham as he wanted people to be the Jews not of the heart but of the outwardappearances of Shawl and hat. Sons of Satan are unfaithful to their forefathers,the Tares mentioned in Matt.13.v24-30 and this John, the Baptist stressed intauntingly telling the Temple Priests that don't you say you are sons ofAbraham, I can turn the stones, thick headed people into the sons of Abraham.So, Baptism of John, the Baptist in water was in the name of Abraham and notthis Father, Son and Holy Spirit as He stressed that the One coming after mewill Baptise you in Holy Spirit and that was Eucharist of Sacrifice or enteringinto the Bridal Chamber that sealed the Eleven to serve God only.

So, Satan shows his ugly head only in this Dark Age and not in any other Age.Angels are people who are Perfect in the Moral Laws in Adam and teach others tobe so. John, the Baptist, Stephen, the outer circle 70 Labourers of ChristJesus trained for John, the Baptist, etc. were all ANGELS and not Saints or theSons of the Most High. Angels enforce the moral laws and as such they are boundby those moral laws too. In other words, Angel are Free men but they have noFree will as the Apostles were both Free men and had Free Wills as well becauseour Father works by grace and so do His Sons. God does not make Laws but statesPrinciples.
Thus, Angel can commit sins but not the Apostles who are no more slave to thesins but to the righteousness of heart. Now, I make remarks about text inthe article. Christ stands for His Word that was in the beginning and He is forever.So, it was Jesus, the Clothing to His Word, that was born and He died on theCross and not Christ, the Title.
Kingdom of Heaven belongs to the Angels whilst the Kingdom of Hell to the sonsof Satan, the spiritually blind fanatic Disciples.
I hope that will make clear the concepts. Gospel not only sets us Free from theYokes of Rabbis, Fake Fathers and their Abbotts but also shows us the RightPath into the Vineyard of our Father where the True Vine Christ Jesus exists.You must enter through the Narrow Gate by becoming solitary. Wide is the Gateof the old covenant of Rabbis, the sons of Satan, Matt.12.v43-45, that has widegate and many wide roads, the cults, leading to the sectarian riots. There aremany Anti Christs with Robes of Fake Fathers, Dog-Collared hirelings of Mammonhypocritically pretending to be working for God, etc. but they get paid inMammon.
In Honour of my anointed Elder Brother Christ Jesus, may God blesses you withholy spirit, common sense.

Dear Readers,

I wonder if you could help me with identifying an argument I have come across in an 7th/8th century manuscript which was produced by a Syrian Orthodox patr? He argues that Satan and his angels (demons) had the opportunity to repent from the time of their fall until the crucifixion of Christ. After, Christ's crucifixion, they no longer can repent, but they have become inheritors of hell. And, kingdom and hell are not 2 creations, but hell is a support of the kingdom. Hell is there for man to fear it so that he will repent and aim at good deeds to be worthy kingdom of heaven.

Now, I wonder which early church fathers are for this idea? if you have come across any church fathers who discuss similar issues in Syriac/Aramaic. Or, Greek texts which were translated into Syriac in the 4th-7th century. I would really appreciate if you could help me by e-mailing me the authours and the name of their texts. Thank you...



#38 Robert

Robert

    New Member

  • Members
  • 2 posts
  • Guest from Another Religious Tradition

Posted 13 January 2015 - 12:20 PM

Some versions make NO mention of a Satan nor any Satan, e.g. The Young's Literal Translation/YLT.

 

How do you go about trying to explain that?



#39 Olga

Olga

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 2,821 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 13 January 2015 - 12:42 PM

Quite easily. Some Bible translations are less accurate to the known originals than others.



#40 Rdr Andreas

Rdr Andreas

    Very Frequent Poster

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,028 posts
  • Orthodox Christian Member

Posted 13 January 2015 - 01:45 PM

Some versions make NO mention of a Satan nor any Satan, e.g. The Young's Literal Translation/YLT.

 

How do you go about trying to explain that?

 

There is no point to be made about this: YLT simply uses the old Anglo-Norman word 'Adversary' which is what the Hebrew and Greek based word Satan means. 'Satan' is more literal since the LXX and Greek NT have Σατανᾶς. Satan/Adversary is mentioned more than fifty times in the Bible and we might remember that the Orthodox Church teaches that only the Greek originals are inspired - no translation is.


Edited by Reader Andreas, 13 January 2015 - 01:50 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users