Comments on: Is Satan Really All that Bad?

By: MCQ

MCQ — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 07:16:38 +0000

Really? That sounds awfully noble for satan. I figured he was all about lookin’ out for #1. Taking a stand on principle ain’t exactly what he’s known for.

By: Seth R.

Seth R. — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 03:37:28 +0000

gloria,

I never said anything about where Satan would end up.

I only speculated whether God would offer forgiveness.

Actually, I rather doubt Satan would accept such forgiveness if offered.

By: gloria

gloria — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 02:55:08 +0000

Hi, seth. Rev. 20:10 states clearly “where” Satan, that ole’ devil will end up. Definately not “forgiven” that’s for sure. :) God created a special place for him where he will tormented night and day forever and man forever is a loooooong time.

Kind regards,
gloria

By: MCQ

MCQ — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 22:47:42 +0000

Geoff: FYI, the IP address for “Mick Jagger” is a one-timer. Not familiar, just a random troll.

By: Seth R.

Seth R. — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 21:15:25 +0000

Well, I know that the movie “Dark Knight” would have totally sucked without evil.

By: Jacob J

Jacob J — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:39:43 +0000

Katie,

Thank you for such a straightforward answer. I must say, that might be the craziest thing I’ve ever seen argued. The idea that the universe is better off with evil deeds than without seems to undermine the whole meaning of the word evil. It seems to suggest that sometimes it is good to be bad, which is a bit like a square triangle if you ask me.

I don’t think the existence of evil leads to a reasonable conclusion that having evil is better. I think it is far more reasonable to conclude that the universe could be better than it is, but that there is no magic wand to make it that way (with the implicit limitation on God’s power).

By: Seth R.

Seth R. — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:26:24 +0000

Geoff,

I don’t have access to IP addresses, so you’ll have to ask Rusty.

And even if I did, I don’t really play that game.

Jack and Blake have past history. I’m sure the remark was completely harmless and I doubt Blake saw it as serious either.

By: Katie Langston

Katie Langston — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 18:09:18 +0000

Are you arguing that a universe with the possibility of evil but with only perfectly righteous free agents is not preferable to a universe with people actually perpetrating evil?

Essentially, yes.

I’m saying it’s possible that there is something about the presence of evil that fulfills God’s purposes better than a universe in which evil does not present itself.

This is not to say that God causes evil, or works evil Himself, simply that He allows free agents to choose it if they wish. What could this reason be that makes the universe better off because of the presence of evil? Hell if I know. I have some speculative thoughts about that, but given that evil does exist, and God doesn’t always stop it (regardless of your theological paradigm), I think it’s reasonable to conclude He allows it because it’s better–even if we can’t fully comprehend why.

By: Geoff J

Geoff J — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 17:32:28 +0000

I’m with you Jack.

I reacted because I am pretty confident that d-bag’s comment in #28 was not nearly so innocuous as your comment and I hate to see trolls like that validated at the expense of my friends.

By: Bridget Jack Meyers

Bridget Jack Meyers — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 17:25:00 +0000

Geoff, FWIW, I didn’t consider it a “potshot” at Blake when I said it, though I don’t know if that was “Mick Jagger”‘s original intention. My humor tends to be abrasive, it’s just my nature, but I had hoped he and everyone else would understand it as a good-natured joke. Blake and I have joked around before; he is my father after all.

If I actually wanted to insult you, Blake or anyone else, trust me, I could do much better than “LOL u iz Satan!”