Satan and God have a conversation in which Satan says he wants to bring harm to Job’s family and then God provides Satan with permission to do so. And then Satan kills Job’s children. That appears to be a clear example of conspiracy to commit murder. Is God conspiring to commit murder with Satan the correct interpretation?

I have come across statements (including from some Orthodox clergy and theologians) suggesting that the Eastern Orthodox Church leaves open the possibility that even the devil could eventually repent and be restored. However, I struggle to reconcile this with passages that describe: The devil being “*tormented day and night forever and ever*” (Revelation 20:10) Some angels being *“kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness”* (Jude 1:6) Christ saying everlasting fire is “*prepared for the devil and his angels”* (Matthew 25:41) My questions are: 1. Is belief in the possible repentance/salvation of Satan an official teaching of the Eastern Orthodox Church, or only a theological opinion held by some within the tradition? 2. If it is a theological opinion within Orthodoxy, how do its proponents interpret the above biblical passages regarding eternal condemnation and chains of darkness?

When I ask this question I usually end up getting the response of: > “Well, that was just him giving us free will!” And then I ask why he would give us free will if he knew we would sin and would send us to Hell. Which gets the response of: > “Well, he didn’t want us to be robots! That would just be awful.” Then this goes on and on. What I’m trying to ask is: why did God give us the ability to sin if he would get so mad at us that he would send us to Hell? Why did God make Satan if he knew he would tempt Adam and Eve? Honestly why even make Satan in the first place?

## Background The character of Satan appears very different in the New Testament as compared to the Hebrew Bible. Some of the apparent stark differences appear below: --- - **The idea that the snake in the garden was Satan** Revelation 12:9; 20:2 identify Satan as an "ancient serpent". Later Christians linked this allusion with the snake from Genesis. On the other hand, the Hebrew bible **never** identifies the snake as anything more than an animal, and certainly never teaches that Satan was disguised as or possessing a snake. --- - **The idea that Satan rules the world as god** Satan is called “the god of this age” in 2 Corinthians 4:4: > In their case **the god of this world** has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing clearly the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. and “the prince of this world” in John 12:31: > Now is the judgment of this world; now the ruler of this world will be driven out The Hebrew Bible no where supports the idea of a supernatural being besides YHVH ruling the world. It repeatedly says that YHVH will not share His power and dominion of the world with another: > I am the LORD; that is my name! I will not yield my glory to another or my praise to idols - Isaiah 42:8 --- - **The idea that Satan is a fallen angel working against God** The NT portrays Satan as a fallen angel in Luke 10:18, and portrays him as working at odds against God's plans of spreading the gospel in 1 Thessalonians 2:18. The Hebrew bible contains no references to 'Satan' falling from heaven or working against God's plans and it portrays Satan as one of many 'sons of God' who remains in God's presence in heaven and in fact does God's commands in Job 1:6-22. ## Question How do Protestants explain these differences? Why is Satan taught to be the "god of this world/age" in the New Testament while this theology is absent in the Hebrew Bible?

One aspect of Christian theology that has long puzzled me concerns the internal logic of those sects and denominations – Catholic, Protestant and Eastern Orthodox alike – that affirm belief in a literal Lucifer. In discussions with adherents from various denominations, I have encountered a range of explanations for Satan’s motivations. However, these explanations tend to converge on a common theme: that Satan, consumed by envy and hatred toward both God and humanity, seeks to inflict as much destruction and suffering as possible. Yet this account raises certain difficulties. The portrayal of Satan as an embodiment of unrestrained malice seems to mirror the archetypal villains of literature and popular culture. Figures whose motivations are often exaggerated or simplistic, such as the spiteful fairy or the vengeful antagonist whose actions are driven by little more than resentment or jealousy. The evil, but just misunderstood and socially outcast, witch. The evil antihero in Pocahontas that just wants to annihilate the native tribe for no good reason, only based on incredibly superficial, shallow and hateful grounds. To me, it appears somewhat incongruous that a being described as possessing superhuman intelligence and insight would act with such emotional impulsivity and self-destructiveness. From a logical standpoint one might expect such a being to recognize the futility of opposing an omnipotent deity and to comprehend that rebellion against ultimate goodness is contrary to its own self-interest. The paradox, then, lies in the idea that Satan, though vastly more intelligent than any human being, acts with less rational foresight than the average person. If Satan is fully aware that his defiance will culminate in his own ruin, his continued opposition to God appears irrational, even absurd. Is Satan like those cartoon characters? Maybe *that is* the answer. Maybe Satan is just so blinded with hatred, for no apparent good reason, that he just cannot stop hating human beings and God’s creation. Maybe Satan is like one of those evil caricature in children’s movies, that just wants to destroy everything no matter the cost. Maybe he just cannot reason about his own self-interests. Maybe Satan is a *theological* caricature, a personification of evil in its most absolute and irrational form. Maybe Satan is a caricature of those characters. Or maybe both are a caricature of what we humans identify as the corrupt, destructive, hateful, malevolent and vicious forces of the world – they both take the evils to their respective extremes. To provide some personal context, I approach this question as an atheist and former believer. I lost my faith at the age of sixteen, and since then I have sought to understand Christianity as an intellectual and cultural system rather than as a lived faith. One aspect I found particularly burdensome within my former belief was the tendency of some Christians to use an interpretive framework that cast all events and moral choices as elements within a vast cosmic, constantly raging, struggle between good and evil. While this worldview can offer moral clarity and a sense of taking moral stances, seeing oneself as a “soldier of God” in a colossal war, it can also be profoundly exhausting. It is a mode of understanding existence that definitively do not miss.

Christian theology generally teaches that only God is omnipresent, while Satan is a created being with limited power and presence. Yet, believers around the world often experience temptations or trials that they attribute to Satan’s influence. How do Christian theologians explain Satan’s ability to seemingly affect or test many people in different locations at once, if he cannot be everywhere? - Does Scripture suggest he works through a network of demons? I’m asking specifically from a biblical and theological standpoint, not from personal opinion.

Speaking from a mormon mentality. But not necessarily a member. Looking for ideas from all Christian denominations. The mormons preach in the pearl of great price, that in the pre earth life, all of humanity gathered to discuss the plan of salvation with god. Lucifer and Jesus came forward and shared their thoughts. Lucifers plan was ultimately shot down and it is said he became prideful and was cast out. Some of the other angels followed him etc etc. My question is this. If "all good things come from god" as said by mormon prophets, then how was an angel in heaven able to experience pride and turn away from god before being subject to the "natural man" state of temptation? And second, if in order for God's plan to work, Adam and eve had to partake of the apple and give into sin, then SATAN HAD TO BE PART OF THE PLAN. Therefore God orchestrated it. Which in turn makes god responsible for creating something evil right? Asking for answers from all views. Against mormonism for mormonism, whatver your thoughts are.

In the Gospels, Jesus is led into the wilderness to be tempted by Satan (Matthew 4:1–11, Luke 4:1–13). As the Son of God, He would have known in advance both that Satan was coming and the kinds of temptations he would present. For Christians, however, temptations often come suddenly and without forewarning. We usually don’t know in advance what form they will take. My question is: Does Jesus’ foreknowledge of the devil’s tactics set His experience of temptation apart from the temptations Christians face, or should it be understood as fundamentally the same kind of testing?

> I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and **create evil**: I the LORD do all these things. ([Isaiah 45:7](https://www.biblehub.com/kjv/isaiah/45.htm)) [emphasis mine] This is consistent with God being called "all-mighty" and "omnipotent". However, it seems to be grossly *incompatible* with God being called "good". If he truly is all these things, why would he create evil, which is the opposite of what is good, which He is claimed to be?

Revelation 13 speaks about the beast deceiving the world and causing people to receive the mark of the beast on their right hand or forehead. This raises the question of just how far-reaching Satan’s deception can be on a global scale. If the Bible warns that the entire world will be deceived into accepting the mark of the beast, does this imply that the devil can successfully promote widespread false beliefs and practices on a global level? How does Christian theology understand the devil’s power to deceive nations, especially considering the vast differences in cultures, languages, and political systems? How could Satan maneuver these differences to bring the whole world into unity under a single deception?

In my discussion with some Jehovah Witnesses, they claimed 1914 was the year referred to in revelation and that Satan came to earth. According to their belief, this is why from 1914 the world has never known peace: thus the world wars, famine escalated, and so on... > **Revelation 12:9-12** > > 9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the > Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out > into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him. > > 12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to > the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down > unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a > short time Are there other traditions that agree with this claim? >1 October 1957 Watchtower: “Satan the Devil failed to prove his false accusation against the chief Son of God. ... That is why, when the kingdom was born in heaven in 1914 and war broke out in heaven and the victorious King Jesus Christ hurled Satan down from heaven to our earth, a loud voice in heaven said: “Now have come to pass the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Christ, because the accuser of our brothers has been hurled down, who accuses them day and night before our God!” (Rev. 12:7-10) https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1957725?q=satan+1914&p=par

> The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. And he > was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted by Satan. And he was > with the wild animals, and the angels were ministering to him. (ESV) > > Mark 1:12–13 In this verse, the Holy Spirit sent Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by Satan. Given that Jesus was the Son of God, the Holy Spirit must have known that Jesus could withstand the temptation. Why did the Holy Spirit do that then?

Deuteronomy 18:21–22 says that if a prophet’s words do not come to pass, then the Lord has not spoken through them. This seems to suggest that fulfilled prophecy is a sign of true prophecy. Some Christians also believe that Satan does not know the future in the way God does (i.e., perfectly and completely), so any accurate future prediction would necessarily come from God. However, in Matthew 24:24, Jesus warns of false prophets performing great signs and wonders that could deceive even the elect if that were possible. Does this imply that even seemingly accurate future predictions could come from deceptive sources? So my question is: Can fulfilled predictions about the future be used as a reliable test to determine whether a prophet is truly from God, considering the claim that Satan does not know the future? Or are there additional biblical criteria that must be used to discern a true prophet?

### Introduction The Genesis narrative of the serpent tempting Adam and Eve and their subsequent expulsion from the Garden of Eve does not seem to indicate overtly that the character known as "Satan" or "the Devil" was involved in any way. The Hebrew bible likewise does not contain any explicit passages co-identifying Satan as the serpent from the garden. However early Christians appear to have identified the Edenic serpent as Satan: **Justin Martyr (c. 100–165 AD), in First Apology §28:** > “For among us the prince of the wicked spirits is called the serpent, and Satan, and the devil...” **Theophilus of Antioch (c. 115–185 AD), *To Autolycus* 2.28:** > “Eve…was deceived by the wicked demon, who also is called Satan, who then spoke to her through the serpent…” **Early Church Tradition (Book of the Cave of Treasures circa 4th–6th century):** > Satan “took up his abode in the serpent… and… watched for the opportunity… and… called [Eve]…” ### Question - What is the origin of this belief? - Does it pre-date Christianity? - What is the earliest written Christian document linking Satan with the serpent? Sources and views from all denominations welcome

I wish to know why I don't hate Lucifer. I just can't seem to bring myself to hate him and i cry for him. And I don't understand why does everyone hate him when the incident he did was so so long ago. Also, I wasn't even born at the time he did those things so why I just I am not joking. I'm not trying to be rude; I just don't understand why am I like this.

Revelation 1:8 and 4:8 describe God as the one "*who was, and is, and is to come*", a phrase emphasizing His eternal nature and unchanging presence across time. In contrast, Revelation 17:8 speaks of the beast (often interpreted as representing the devil or a satanic figure), saying it "*was, and is not, and is to come,*" which appears to mimic God’s description but with a distorted twist. **What attribute of God is being emphasized through this triadic formula?** And how does the similar but corrupted version applied to the beast expose the devil's nature as unstable, temporal, or counterfeit? Is this a deliberate contrast showing God's immutability and sovereignty versus the devil's impermanence or false imitation of divine authority?

The first mention in the Bible of the devil or Satan being judged is in Genesis 3, on the occasion of the fall of Adam and Eve, with the serpent generally accepted as either being Satan or being controlled by him. This Genesis 3 judgment may be eternal condemnation and imprisonment in hell or lesser punishment. What is the earliest prophecy (chronologically, according to traditional dating) in the Bible that states unequivocally that Satan will be cast into hell for eternity with no chance of repentance and forgiveness? I ask this so as to get closer to the answer to a larger question: was deceiving Adam and Eve or a prior rebellion in heaven the occasion of Satan's prison sentence without possibility of parole, or is it something that Satan did or will do later in history?

Christians across denominations appear to believe the snake who tempted Eve in Eden was actually Satan. If the being who tempted Eve was actually Satan, why were snakes cursed to crawl on their bellies and eat dust for all time? Do Christians believe God knew the snake was actually Satan? Why do Christians believe snakes have moral culpability for what Satan did?

The devil deceived Eve into eating what was forbidden. She then persuaded Adam to do likewise. After eating, they gained knowledge of good and evil. It is my view that God's true intentions, his omnibenevolence, is presented in the Ten Commandments and the Bible. Basically they are a moral guide to overcome the sin we all inherited from Adam and Eve. But what was Eve's situation before the bite? Did she have knowledge of good and evil? Was she pure still and acting as God meant her to act? Why is gaining knowledge of good and evil in the devil's advantage? Because she had no knowledge of the bad yet? She knew the good neither. Wasn't it a great gift then, the devil gave her with the apple? What gain had the devil to give her knowledge of the good? If Eve had no knowledge of good, how she could act good? By divine instinct? What was in it for the evil devil Satan, disguised as a luring snake? Was this, as the fallen angle, his way to take revenge on God? By letting people know what is bad? At the same time he gave knowledge of the good. Wasn't it better to give Eve knowledge of the bad only?

I remember being taught in an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist Church when I was in middle school that Satan took one third of the angels in heaven with him after being cast out of God's presence for rebellion. The only biblical reference I can locate that might be construed as support for this belief is **Revelation 12:4**: >Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. (NIV) I'm sure there are other scriptures that are commonly used in conjunction with this one to justify the belief, but I can't find any that seem to make sense in context, or that address the topic specifically. After discussing this and other issues regarding angels with conservative Baptist friends of mine, I found that some of them base a significant portion of their beliefs about angels, the nephilim, and other supernatural activity and beings on the Book of Enoch, but they always emphasized that they do not view Enoch as canon and as having much less authority than the scriptures. How do Baptists who hold this position defend it using canonical scripture? Also, are there any significant denominations or popular preachers who have maintained this belief?