Will The Real Devil Please Stand Up: Sifting Through Truth And Tradition

[Maidservant]

You have to take into account all scripture to get a more clear picture.

I agree. My point also.

[Maidservant]

Same thing that makes us the devil.

Pride. "WHO are YOU to tell ME what to do??!! I am gonna do it MY way!!"

I also would love to examine this PRIDE as THE "original" sin. I am not sure that in this case pride can be equated with arrogance. I once learned for myself that pride is anything that would separate us from God and others, anything that would sever the family and celestial bond (love), but it has been a while since I thought on it.

[mfbukowski]

There must have been an evil presence tempting Lucifer for him to have agency to choose evil and pride.

I'm not trying to be argumentative but if you think that, then that is an eternal regress- some presence to tempt he who tempted Lucifer and then an presence to tempt him etc etc etc etc at infinitum.

I suppose there's nothing wrong with that- many believe that God had a father etc in an infinite regress as well.

I have no problem with that per se- but why bother with it when what is important is how evil works in our lives? I mean we can get caught up in who is responsible and who was responsible for who was responsible but to me that is just..... talk. It doesn't make a whole lot of difference.

I mean we all have genealogies thousands of generations long, but I am talking to YOU not your great great great grandfather. Where my big nose came from might be nice to know, but it doesn't much matter unless I have a cold!

[Maidservant]

This is an infant's POV taken to the extreme.

Which is interesting because an infant is sacred and innocent.

I am still thinking through what our natural state is (pride? etc?) or even through what pride is, so not sure what else I could comment on the points you make.

[CV75]

This caught my attention (from your post #5): “We are the gods and we are the devils.”

2 Nephi 9:7-10 explains that we are not and cannot become devils because of the infinite atonement. Without it, we would have become devils “if the flesh should rise no more,” but because of the wisdom, mercy and grace of God, this is not the case.

According to this passage, the devil “transformeth himself nigh unto an angel of light, and stirreth up the children of men unto secret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness.”

Verses 11-12 then mention “our escape from the grasp of this awful monster … [which is] death and hell.” This monster is clearly not the devil in person, but the conditions in which he dwells and into which invites us, in opposition to the freedom of this pleasing god [which is life and light], which likewise cannot be Christ in Person, but the conditions in which He dwells and into which he invites us.

In the Garden of Eden, he seems to have invited Adam and Eve to die without the benefits of an infinite atonement, but not knowing the mind of God (Moses 4:6) and lacking the wherewithal to deliver them up to “the monster,” we know the rest of the story. His backup plan may have been for them to partake of the tree of life and remain forever in their sins which was also thwarted (Alma 42:2-5), but I don’t want to speculate too much even for the sake of discussion.

So we know there is a devil and a Christ inviting us into one condition or another, and that it is impossible to forever remain dead in the body, and impossible for the spirit to die except “as to things pertaining unto righteousness (Alma 12:16-18).” Dying as to things pertaining unto righteousness is not quite a devil because the body is still immortal. D&C 76 and 131 of course fill in the gaps.

Am I missing the actual question you are trying to get at?

[Maidservant]

This actually made me giggle a little:

Lehi in 2 Nephi 2:17

"And, I, Lehi, according to the things which I have read, must needs suppose that an angel of God, according to that which is written, had fallen from heaven; wherefore, he became a devil, having sought that which was evil before God."

Lehi actually comes a little short of saying, This is actually what happened or this is what was revealed to me. He says, this is what I read, this is what is written, this what I must needs suppose.

Interesting. HE is engaging the text as well, and trying to figure out what knowledge he can gather from it, from which (perhaps) we get the marvelous whole rest of the chapter.

Edited December 15, 2012 by Maidservant

[mfbukowski]

I also would love to examine this PRIDE as THE "original" sin. I am not sure that in this case pride can be equated with arrogance. I once learned for myself that pride is anything that would separate us from God and others, anything that would sever the family and celestial bond (love), but it has been a while since I thought on it.

"Pride is enmity toward God and toward man"

This is a great, classic talk:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcle5-m81-0

[mfbukowski]

So maybe it all boils down to, if I don't believe in a devil, I'm Athiest. But if I do then I'm not? Or have I simplified? I worry about it because I'm sick of worrying about the bogey man, devil. But don't want to become Agnostic or Athiest. It's a quandry.

So don't believe it. I don't believe that question is on the temple recommend interview or the baptismal interview. Your interpretation may vary. Think for yourself, and follow your conscience and the spirit.

Of course our more fundamentalist brothers and sisters here will probably have something to say about that, but it doesn't matter.

[mfbukowski]

Which is interesting because an infant is sacred and innocent.

I am still thinking through what our natural state is (pride? etc?) or even through what pride is, so not sure what else I could comment on the points you make.

Pride is again the key- Pride is enmity to God and man.

"The natural man is an enemy to God"- Why? Because he is prideful!

The whole reason we have come to earth - literally or figuratively- is to overcome our natural pride and become servants of Good/God.

True service to others is impossible without humility.

That talk by President Benson is an incredible talk- total evidence that indeed he was a prophet of the Lord.

Edited December 15, 2012 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

I also would love to examine this PRIDE as THE "original" sin. I am not sure that in this case pride can be equated with arrogance. I once learned for myself that pride is anything that would separate us from God and others, anything that would sever the family and celestial bond (love), but it has been a while since I thought on it.

Me, I think it is in a sense the only sin, elevating our will, our desires, our impulses, etc. above all else in existence. All other sins seem to be a result of some version of placing "my will" first.

It is not arrogance, it is selfcenteredness or selfishness. We nurture the inability to see others' POV rather than nurture empathy and seek oneness with each other.

Edited December 15, 2012 by calmoriah

[Calm]

Which is interesting because an infant is sacred and innocent.

I am still thinking through what our natural state is (pride? etc?) or even through what pride is, so not sure what else I could comment on the points you make.

Well, Lucifer was once sacred and innocent until he allowed himself to go to the extreme.

[Calm]

It is not arrogance, it is selfcenteredness or selfishness. We nurture the inability to see others' POV rather than nurture empathy and seek oneness with each other.

More on this, I suspect that both qualities of selfcenteredness and a desire to be one with others are present in each of us, both in the prexistence as well as in the "natural man" here in mortality. We are here to learn which is more important to us, to be one with our loved ones or to simply exist in ourselves without concern for others.

[pogi]

I don't believe that it was necessary for there to be someone whispering in his ear telling him to do wrong. The opposition is within ourselves.

I don't believe that someone was literally whispering in his ear, just as I don't think that Satan is always whispering in our ears to do wrong, just as Christ is not always whispering in our ears to do right. These are figures of speech. The "whispering" is most often the influence of light and darkness rather than an audible voice. This light and darkness is in us, but it does not originate from us. It emanates from other beings. It must have been so with Lucifer as well.

There is no capacity built into us to do evil without an evil presence, just as there is no capacity built in us to do good without God.

The opposition is in ourselves so far as we invite both light and darkness in, It does not originate from us.

[Calm]

It emanates from other beings. It must have been so with Lucifer as well.

There is no capacity built into us to do evil without an evil presence, just as there is no capacity built in us to do good without God.

Then how was this possible since we were in the presence of God where no darkness can dwell?

[pogi]

"Pride is enmity toward God and toward man"

This is a great, classic talk:

I love this talk! But there is one thing that I find even more dangerous and dark than pride, it is toxic shame. The belief that one is bad or evil in some way. It, in my mind, is the father and precursor to pride.

I think of how Adam must have felt in the garden after partaking of the fruit. Upon hearing the voice of the Lord, Lucifer warned both Adam and Eve, and I paraphrase: ‘See that you are naked, take some fig leaves and cover your nakedness, quick hide!’ For the first time, the human race discovered shame, and it was introduced not by man, neither by God, but by the author of lies and deceit himself, that great serpent - even Lucifer. I can imagine the fear that must have come over them as they heeded the words of that conniving serpent, the author of shame and fear himself, as he pointed out their nakedness before God. I can imagine Lucifer whispering, “You have done it now, you have destroyed the plan of God, you have ruined everything, it’s all your fault, you are a big mistake, you are better off hiding from Him now, He will never accept you like this, can’t you see that you are naked, quick hide!” The difference between guilt and sham is that sorrowful guilt influences us to seek reconciliation before the Lord, while toxic shame influences us to hide from the Lord.

Out of this state of shame, fear, and self-judgment, was born a new perspective on life. This new perspective says that I have to look out for myself now; I am broken, nobody will accept me if they find out. Before partaking of the fruit, they were completely dependent on the Lord for everything; they were provided everything they needed for eternal survival so long as they obeyed his command. Now that they had disobeyed, there was no promise. Their mindset had changed from dependence on the Lord for preservation, to a self-preserving/protecting paradigm. By judging themselves in believing that they were bad, they denied the judgment of God, and thus placed their judgment above his own. In judging ourselves, we come to believe that we know what is best for ourselves. Pride begins to build a wall of enmity (symbolic of the wall of bushes and trees that Adam hid behind) between us and God as we pit our will against God’s, in a spirit of my will and not thine be done. Absolute truth which once revolved around God, turned into relative truth in Adam’s mind, which revolved around Adam; it had to be that way if he wanted to survive, or so he thought. Their hiding from the Lord was the first self-centered act of man; it was the first act of pride. So we can see that it is out of shame, fear, and self-judgment that ironically the antonym of shame is born, even pride.

It is interesting to note that after eating the fruit, Adam and Eve were naked and exposed before Lucifer and were not ashamed. They could be themselves around Lucifer and have nothing to fear, nothing to be ashamed of, perfectly comfortable in whatever they did, as Lucifer wanted them to know that he would accept them just the way they were. He was attempting to win them over. If he could simply make them feel comfortable and accepted around him while feeling shameful and fearful around God, the battle would mostly be won; shame and fear would lead to the take over of pride which would blind the eyes of men from the truth.

Here were their choices as they saw them at the time: They could stay in hiding and live in constant shame and fear, or face their fears and present themselves before the Lord; knowing that the consequence for their actions was death.

While Satan burdened them with toxic shame that says, “I am bad and need to hide”; the voice of the Lord in the distance blessed them with a healthy sense of guilt that contrasts the voice of the devil by creating a feeling that says, “I feel remorse for my mistake and desire to be reconciled before my maker.”

In transgressing the law we will always hear two voices. One voice will be from the adversary, his message will always bring toxic shame which leads to despair. The voice of the Father through the spirit and light of Christ, on the other hand, will always bring healthy guilt which leads to hope. It has been my experience, and seems to be the pattern in all things that Satan seems to always get to us first. Shame seems to always strike before guilt if we hearken to its voice as did Adam and Eve. After suffering the shame of their mistake they chose to hearken unto the voice of the Father calling after them. With nothing more than a righteous guilt and a hope for mercy, they chose to heed the voice of their father and present themselves before him.

I don’t believe that it was the transgression of eating the fruit that was the original sin (as they knew neither good nor evil), it was the hiding of themselves from God because of shame. It is interesting to note that we naturally think of guilt and shame as a consequence of sin, but in the first case, it was actually the pre-curser to it. Shame is one of the greatest tools which Satan has at his disposal; it is through shame that we hide ourselves from God. It is through pride that we stay in hiding, and so it was from the beginning.

Edited December 15, 2012 by pogi

[pogi]

Then how was this possible since we were in the presence of God where no darkness can dwell?

It is clear that Lucifer was in the presence of the Father even after seeking his honor and power. He battled with the Father in darkness, in His presence, stealing away many of his own children. Satan was in the presence of the Father in the garden of Eden as well. So, I don't know how to reconcile the two ideas. Any thoughts?

[Calm]

It is clear that Lucifer was in the presence of the Father even after seeking his honor and power. He battled with the Father in darkness, in His presence, stealing away many of his own children. Satan was in the presence of the Father in the garden of Eden as well. So, I don't know how to reconcile the two ideas. Any thoughts?

In the full presence in the garden? Don't think so. And I would be reluctant to take certain portrayals as literal, historical truth. They might be highly simplified versions of what actually happened.

I think once he made the final, full commitment to his own honor and power, he was out of there. Up to that point he could have repented. Speculation, of course.

IIRC, the scriptures state/imply that he didn't battle directly with the Father but those that the Father appointed.

Edited December 15, 2012 by calmoriah

[pogi]

I think once he made the final, full commitment to his own honor and power, he was out of there. Up to that point he could have repented. Speculation, of course.

IIRC, the scriptures state/imply that he didn't battle directly with the Father but those that the Father appointed.

You may be right, we simply don't know. Even if he did battle, as you say, with those that the Father appointed, that implies that they could be influenced by evil in the presence of God, the same way that I am suggesting that Lucifer was influenced before he fell. And, that still does not explain how he became an agent unto himself to choose evil without evil being present, thus having the option of evil. Satan chose evil. How did he find it?

[Maidservant]

This caught my attention (from your post #5): “We are the gods and we are the devils.”

2 Nephi 9:7-10 explains that we are not and cannot become devils because of the infinite atonement. Without it, we would have become devils “if the flesh should rise no more,” but because of the wisdom, mercy and grace of God, this is not the case.

According to this passage, the devil “transformeth himself nigh unto an angel of light, and stirreth up the children of men unto secret combinations of murder and all manner of secret works of darkness.”

Verses 11-12 then mention “our escape from the grasp of this awful monster … [which is] death and hell.” This monster is clearly not the devil in person, but the conditions in which he dwells and into which invites us, in opposition to the freedom of this pleasing god [which is life and light], which likewise cannot be Christ in Person, but the conditions in which He dwells and into which he invites us.

In the Garden of Eden, he seems to have invited Adam and Eve to die without the benefits of an infinite atonement, but not knowing the mind of God (Moses 4:6) and lacking the wherewithal to deliver them up to “the monster,” we know the rest of the story. His backup plan may have been for them to partake of the tree of life and remain forever in their sins which was also thwarted (Alma 42:2-5), but I don’t want to speculate too much even for the sake of discussion.

So we know there is a devil and a Christ inviting us into one condition or another, and that it is impossible to forever remain dead in the body, and impossible for the spirit to die except “as to things pertaining unto righteousness (Alma 12:16-18).” Dying as to things pertaining unto righteousness is not quite a devil because the body is still immortal. D&C 76 and 131 of course fill in the gaps.

Am I missing the actual question you are trying to get at?

Maybe. In providing this (non-scriptural) statement: We are the gods and we are the devils: -- I am not discussing our full, final and ultimate potential. I am talking about: 1. our choices and our accountability and our powers of creation; 2. that we are ALL in this together--this grand purpose of life and mortal adventure, we knew what we would be doing here, and the nature of our progression, and that, as I understand him, our heavenly Father is the president of this adventure, but we are gods with him--he is holding on to us as we go down into the waters of baptism, and he is our father, but in another sense he is the same as us in the same way that a father holding his daughter in the token ordinance of baptism that we do, are the same--but not, since the father has grown farther than the daughter; 3. that by the same token I do not need to provide any acknowledgement to any being that there MAY be who is evil, I do not need to crown him with anything, just the same as I avoid all criminals on this earth if possible and don't hear them, nor do I think there is ONE being from which darkness emanates (still thinking on that, but it is more on the is darkness its own thing or really the absence of light); 4. that at least as I am thinking now, the offering of the Son and the offering of Lucifer is a template for our OWN offerings and of the offering of the history of this world, and that this is the meaning of the story; 5. that WE HAVE fallen--so what is the difference between IF ANY Lucifer's fall and our own or is this really for us to understand so we can mend our lost-ness and get back home.

I do think that the light of Christ is through all the earth and that even the most depraved humans are savable (theoretically, although I don't think all will choose it, which is more of what I am saying), and that that is what we are DOING on this earth--the WORK of Christ, the WORK of the atonement.

I haven't taken a lot of time to ponder this particular passage you bring up, so I think I need to. But as you mention yourself, there is a smooshing of talking about Christ and the devil as both persons and conditions. But when I read that I hear it being much more common sense as in, "you call it hell, but it's spiritual death really". Even the place where it says the devil transforms to an angel of light and convinces people to make combinations--is this REALLY a bodily (spirit) visitation or, again, a description of the effects of the "spirit of the devil" (2 Ne 2); or an anthropological description of the narratives we believe because we think they are GOOD but we can't see through them to the traps they are, the captivity we can be in if we act against the light of Christ.

Any time we discuss the Adam and Eve story, I am already going to be off page with everyone, because I understand that to be the endowment, a symbolic portrayal of our opportunity to and the mechanics of our transformation (sanctification, exaltation), NOT a historical moment, so already the persons portrayed do not PORTRAY PERSONS in historical moments (including the portrayed deceiver as ONE BEING CROWNED WITH THAT EVIL KINGSHIP). They portray entire realities or categories, including ones where we can fit our selves into each part. The Adam and Eve story specifically is meant to be worn as a skin over our own lives--we WEAR the story and live it in order to understand it.

"Pride is enmity toward God and toward man"

This is a great, classic talk:

Yes. I remember when it came out. Must have rubbed off on me and thanks for the opportunity to re-visit it.

I don't believe that someone was literally whispering in his ear, just as I don't think that Satan is always whispering in our ears to do wrong, just as Christ is not always whispering in our ears to do right. These are figures of speech. The "whispering" is most often the influence of light and darkness rather than an audible voice.

Agree totally.

This light and darkness is in us, but it does not originate from us. It emanates from other beings. It must have been so with Lucifer as well.

There is no capacity built into us to do evil without an evil presence, just as there is no capacity built in us to do good without God.

The opposition is in ourselves so far as we invite both light and darkness in, It does not originate from us.

I guess I will have to study more on 'emanating', 'originate', 'source'. I'm just not seeing how this is even relevant really and seems like semantics or a difference in an understanding of how the universe works mechanically, so I will just have to study.

But I do know that we, in this mortality, have not reached our full potential, so we must rely on Christ. And I myself through life experience know that I cannot be good without Christ.

I love this talk! But there is one thing that I find even more dangerous and dark than pride, it is toxic shame. The belief that one is bad or evil in some way. It, in my mind, is the father and precursor to pride.

I think of how Adam must have felt in the garden after partaking of the fruit. Upon hearing the voice of the Lord, Lucifer warned both Adam and Eve, and I paraphrase: ‘See that you are naked, take some fig leaves and cover your nakedness, quick hide!’ For the first time, the human race discovered shame, and it was introduced not by man, neither by God, but by the author of lies and deceit himself, that great serpent - even Lucifer. I can imagine the fear that must have come over them as they heeded the words of that conniving serpent, the author of shame and fear himself, as he pointed out their nakedness before God. I can imagine Lucifer whispering, “You have done it now, you have destroyed the plan of God, you have ruined everything, it’s all your fault, you are a big mistake, you are better off hiding from Him now, He will never accept you like this, can’t you see that you are naked, quick hide!” The difference between guilt and sham is that sorrowful guilt influences us to seek reconciliation before the Lord, while toxic shame influences us to hide from the Lord.

Out of this state of shame, fear, and self-judgment, was born a new perspective on life. This new perspective says that I have to look out for myself now; I am broken, nobody will accept me if they find out. Before partaking of the fruit, they were completely dependent on the Lord for everything; they were provided everything they needed for eternal survival so long as they obeyed his command. Now that they had disobeyed, there was no promise. Their mindset had changed from dependence on the Lord for preservation, to a self-preserving/protecting paradigm. By judging themselves in believing that they were bad, they denied the judgment of God, and thus placed their judgment above his own. In judging ourselves, we come to believe that we know what is best for ourselves. Pride begins to build a wall of enmity (symbolic of the wall of bushes and trees that Adam hid behind) between us and God as we pit our will against God’s, in a spirit of my will and not thine be done. Absolute truth which once revolved around God, turned into relative truth in Adam’s mind, which revolved around Adam; it had to be that way if he wanted to survive, or so he thought. Their hiding from the Lord was the first self-centered act of man; it was the first act of pride. So we can see that it is out of shame, fear, and self-judgment that ironically the antonym of shame is born, even pride.

It is interesting to note that after eating the fruit, Adam and Eve were naked and exposed before Lucifer and were not ashamed. They could be themselves around Lucifer and have nothing to fear, nothing to be ashamed of, perfectly comfortable in whatever they did, as Lucifer wanted them to know that he would accept them just the way they were. He was attempting to win them over. If he could simply make them feel comfortable and accepted around him while feeling shameful and fearful around God, the battle would mostly be won; shame and fear would lead to the take over of pride which would blind the eyes of men from the truth.

Here were their choices as they saw them at the time: They could stay in hiding and live in constant shame and fear, or face their fears and present themselves before the Lord; knowing that the consequence for their actions was death.

While Satan burdened them with toxic shame that says, “I am bad and need to hide”; the voice of the Lord in the distance blessed them with a healthy sense of guilt that contrasts the voice of the devil by creating a feeling that says, “I feel remorse for my mistake and desire to be reconciled before my maker.”

In transgressing the law we will always hear two voices. One voice will be from the adversary, his message will always bring toxic shame which leads to despair. The voice of the Father through the spirit and light of Christ, on the other hand, will always bring healthy guilt which leads to hope. It has been my experience, and seems to be the pattern in all things that Satan seems to always get to us first. Shame seems to always strike before guilt if we hearken to its voice as did Adam and Eve. After suffering the shame of their mistake they chose to hearken unto the voice of the Father calling after them. With nothing more than a righteous guilt and a hope for mercy, they chose to heed the voice of their father and present themselves before him.

I don’t believe that it was the transgression of eating the fruit that was the original sin (as they knew neither good nor evil), it was the hiding of themselves from God because of shame. It is interesting to note that we naturally think of guilt and shame as a consequence of sin, but in the first case, it was actually the pre-curser to it. Shame is one of the greatest tools which Satan has at his disposal; it is through shame that we hide ourselves from God. It is through pride that we stay in hiding, and so it was from the beginning.

Very good. I shall be thinking on this for quite a while.

[Maidservant]

As I said, in the Old Testament, the (English) word "devil" does not appear. The usage is always "devils" and it seems to refer to--well, I really don't know what? What was the cosmology of the ones who made those references? It seems like a conception of some beings (living? dead? some other idea?). But the passages discuss the sacrifices (of children) made to the devils, so it seems there is at least some equation with the false gods. A question we might ask--to what degree to we say that men (mankind) invented false gods and went after them and thus can be said to be the 'originators' of (that) evil; and to what degree did unembodied beings (spirits) influence mankind to make these false gods and sacrifices--and do the narrative of the gods correspond one-to-one with specific evil spirits (i.e. does the Baal god correspond to ONE evil spirit named Baal, or are there any number of evil spirits invested in the propaganda program that resulted in killing of children and the enslavement of the minds and hearts and spirits of living people?). And if we are saying the latter is closer to the truth, are we then saying that mankind is helpless in the face of evil spirits with a compelling story of power and indulgence and a cool animal god? So are we saying that evil unembodied spirits are more powerful that bodied spirits (which we are)? Are some BODIED spirits--evil spirits also? So where does the buck end for who can cause someone to do something?

In the Old Testament, the word Satan appears 15 times, 11 of them in Job. Let me make a disclaimer that until I learn better (and I'm sure I can since I don't know), Job reads like a fictional account. However, it is still important because it represents the world and religious view of those who produced it. So it didn't come out of a vacuum, so if Satan is a character in Job, there is some idea that there is an understanding of what or who Satan does or is.

At no point during the book of Job does Satan entice Job to do evil. He does not do anything that would be considered enticing or talking or whispering or influencing. So perhaps whoever wrote the book does not consider opposition or evil to take that format.

Rather, Satan causes trouble in terms of causing terrible loss to Job. He causes Job to lose his family and his prosperity and his health. IN THE FACE OF THESE GREAT CHALLENGES, Job's CHOICE is not between good and evil per se--it is between remembering God or cursing and forgetting God. It is between continuing to obey God's laws or refusing to obey God's laws, even though he did not receive reward, but instead struggle. To keep integrity in the face of destruction. The book of Job continues to frame the purpose of the gospel as a very immediate enterprise for THIS LIFE (not to hope on an afterlife, for example), and the acts of the adversary look very much like the REAL LIFE we have to live with every day--the struggles of loss, and even in today's thinking we do NOT ascribe these things to Satan (like hurricanes--it's just reality, not Satan; in our modern idea of opposition, we put Satan at the point of where we choose to face these forces and disasters). But in Job, Satan is put at the point of the disaster and he does not seem to have an energetic influence over Job, who must, like us, choose how he will face the losses of this world. In fact, ha ha, the voice of influence about whether to curse God is left to Job's erstwhile living friends/neighbors--THESE provide the influence.

One of my points is that our concept of the devil and of Satan and of what the main problems of evil are in this world have DEVELOPED over time--over millennia, centuries, since OT times, since NT times, since the Restored Church started until today.

[Maidservant]

In the New Testament, the use of the word devil is not always, but most often plural also, and most often seems to refer to any number of evil or unclean spirits. Jesus even called one of the 12 (Judas) "a devil". There is no sense that there is one, crowned devil, but that there is a lot in this world and in the unembodied world that are prepared to do mischief. 1 Corinthians 10:21 has an interesting and singular passage where it discusses that WE need to make a choice whether to drink the cup of devils and eat at the table of devils (rather than the Lord). None of these passages seem to describe the cosmological and mechanistic and ontological theological universe that we are used to thinking of (i.e. a single devil).

(another post I will look for the word Satan)

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I am starting this thread because I felt this issue was derailing the Pelagianism thread.

I am also going to use this as an opportunity to educate myself further, so I am not saying I know everything.

I will start by trying to post and quote several posts from the Pelagianism thread that began this exchange.

And then I think the ball is in my court to provide a reply, so I will do that as soon as I can although I have to go do some Cub Scouting pretty soon, may have to return later to finish the reply (and have to do the reading in the Book of Mormon that was requested).

But anyone with thoughts can certainly get the ball rolling more while I'm gone.

I believe that Joseph said..."Satan has no power over us, except that which we give him". Satan only speaks the language of the "natural man"...which means he has limited intelligence.

[pogi]

I guess I will have to study more on 'emanating', 'originate', 'source'. I'm just not seeing how this is even relevant really and seems like semantics or a difference in an understanding of how the universe works mechanically, so I will just have to study.

But I do know that we, in this mortality, have not reached our full potential, so we must rely on Christ. And I myself through life experience know that I cannot be good without Christ.

This is not just a matter of how the universe works mechanically, this is a matter of how we work. It is important to understand the concept of light and darkness and our relation to it. It is important to know that we can do no good without Christ and his light, it is equally important to know that we can do no evil without Satan and his darkness. It is good to know what forces we are dealing with. By understanding that evil and darkness do not originate from within, it helps us to avoid toxic shame (and thus hide from God) while maintaining healthy guilt. By understanding that light does not originate from within, it helps us to maintain true humility and submissiveness.

We do not create good and evil, they already exist, and we are like faucets that good and evil flow through. The goal is to keep the facuet of light open while keeping the faucet of darkness tightly closed. This in no way frees us from accountability for the evil that we perform, we will be held accountable for the evil that we allow to flow through us. Our moral agency is a matter of how we manage the faucets. We do not create good or evil any more than a faucet creates hot or cold water, or any more than a wire creates electricity. We are simply conductors like the wire and the faucet when it comes to moral agency. The Lord may create through us, but I am not the author of it. Equally the Devil may create through us, but I am not the author of it, but I will be held liable for it. They are the architects and we are the laborers in this life, the laborers in the vineyard. We start out as laborers than become architects ourself. Or, another way to think of it is like this: God and the devil are generators, and we are conductors. We are conductors learning to become generators.

You say that you cannot be good without Christ, but if you then believe that you don't need a devil to be or do evil, then you must be somehow inherently evil. I fully reject that notion. We are neither good nor evil, but are in probation. One day we will be made good or evil, but it will not be our doing.

Edited December 16, 2012 by pogi

[The Nehor]

The scriptures make it clear that there is a being, an angel fallen from the heavenly courts, who tempts us- but the grand secret he tries to hide from us is that he is utterly powerless. satan is only as powerful as the choices we make and the power we give to him.

So the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Yes, there IS an actual "devil". Yes, WE are the ones that create the evil around us.

I do not wish to sound creepy but the devil's power was enough to nearly destroy young Joseph and scare Moses. He and his followers have some power not tied to our choices.

[CV75]

…our choices and our accountability and our powers of creation…

Consisting of our enticement to make various choices by others with the power to entice (just as we have the power to influence others).

…our heavenly Father is the president of this adventure…

Which suggests there is a being in opposition to Him - not capable of equal magnitude, but of opposite direction; and a being He did not choose to lead us.

…the absence of light…

Darkness results from turning away from and blocking the light (an example of being incapable of equal magnitude but of opposite direction). This is why darkness cannot “emanate” from such a being.

the offering of the Son and the offering of Lucifer is a template for our OWN offerings

Yes, and they are symbols as well as real people.

WE HAVE fallen--so what is the difference between IF ANY Lucifer's fall and our own

I think the difference is that even in our fall, we fundamentally want to get back home no matter how far we stray (as evidenced in that we will all be resurrected, and by your observation that “we knew what we would be doing here”), and in Lucifer’s case, he does not want to get back home and tugs at us in that direction, even if only to entice us into further spiritual death than that which we would have attained without him (otherwise our spiritual death would be no more severe than Adam and Eve's after the Fall, which wasn' so bad, and if they were the worst example mankind could have, how badly could they entice anyone to do worse than they?).