A question about Satan's plan

[Justice]

Of course he did, when he knowingly disobeyed God and partook of the FORBIDDEN fruit. But it's a moot point, since God did not allow that to take place.

I wasn't speaking about the consequences to just Adam and Eve, I was speaking of those consequences to God's plan in general.

I was speaking about how mankind would be born, and what those sets of consequences would be like, when contrasted.

You know, I read and re-read your comments about what I've said and it's clear to me I have a hard time communicating to you. I realize I am not an expert in expressing myself, and I'm not coming across at all the way I intend. I can't express even the simplest points without being misunderstood.

I think maybe we start from a different belief foundation, and we would have to go back to those basics in order to understand each other's views of these deeper parts.

[Justice]

Same here, Bro. Rudick.

GS Agency

Of every tree thou mayest freely eat, Gen. 2: 16. Man could not act for himself save it should be that he was enticed, 2 Ne. 2: 15-16. Men are free to choose liberty and eternal life or captivity and death, 2 Ne. 2: 27. Ye are free; ye are permitted to act for yourselves, Hel. 14: 30. A third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away because of their agency, D&C 29: 36. It must needs be that the devil should tempt men, or they could not be agents, D&C 29: 39. Let every man choose for himself, D&C 37: 4. Every man may act according to the moral agency which I have given unto him, D&C 101: 78. Satan sought to destroy the agency of man, Moses 4: 3. The Lord gave unto man his agency, Moses 7: 32.

BD War in Heaven

This term arises out of Rev. 12: 7 and refers to the conflict that took place in the premortal existence among the spirit children of God. The war was primarily over how and in what manner the plan of salvation would be administered to the forthcoming human family upon the earth. The issues involved such things as agency, how to gain salvation, and who should be the Redeemer. The war broke out because one-third of the spirits refused to accept the appointment of Jesus Christ as the Savior. Such a refusal was a rebellion against the Father’s plan of redemption. It was evident that if given agency, some persons would fall short of complete salvation; Lucifer and his followers wanted salvation to come automatically to all who passed through mortality, without regard to individual preference, agency, or voluntary dedication (see Isa. 14: 12-20; Luke 10: 18; Rev. 12: 4-13; D&C 29: 36-38; Moses 4: 1-4). The spirits who thus rebelled and persisted were thrust out of heaven and cast down to the earth without mortal bodies, “and thus came the devil and his angels” (D&C 29: 37; see also Rev. 12: 9; Abr. 3: 24-28).

I also propose Alma 43 and 44 is an exceptional play-by-play of the pre-mortal war in heaven. Just change the names. :)

Edited March 11, 2009 by Justice

[Webster]

Those aren't dictionaries.

Also, one scripture reference that talks about choosing and another reference that contains the word agency do not a definition make.

One scripture you have is D&C 101:78. You have highlighted act and agency in the same verse. Very good. The dictionary says that agency is related to acting. But it does not say choice.

We get the idea that agency is the same as choice from the old protestant/philosophical term of "free agency" which describes a certain type of agency, without defining what agency itself means.

I would expect God knew and used the correct meaning of Agency from the dictionary. I do not think we should rely on protestantism or philosophy to define it for the Latter-day Saints.

[Justice]

I was just attempting to add more information and scripture references.

I still believe to have agency you don't have to choose, or even have opposition to choose between.

Agency, to me, simply means that you have the ability to choose.

From God's intended definiton when He "gave man his agency" in the Garden of Eden, He meant man was now free to exercise his agency and choose according to his will.

He could choose eternal life or eternal damnation. Since the plan of redemption was far enough along that man would fall and be redeemed, he was free to exercise his agency to eventually choose eternal life, choosing against God's will along the way, which choice he was not free to make in the pre-mortal existence, even though man had his agency. If he chose against God's will in the pre-mortal existence the consequences were eternal since there was no means provided to redeem until the state death came upon man.

But, I've already said that.

Agency and "free" agency seem to be different.

[Traveler]

I was just attempting to add more information and scripture references.

I still believe to have agency you don't have to choose, or even have opposition to choose between.

Agency, to me, simply means that you have the ability to choose.

From God's intended definiton when He "gave man his agency" in the Garden of Eden, He meant man was now free to exercise his agency and choose according to his will.

He could choose eternal life or eternal damnation. Since the plan of redemption was far enough along that man would fall and be redeemed, he was free to exercise his agency to eventually choose eternal life, choosing against God's will along the way, which choice he was not free to make in the pre-mortal existence, even though man had his agency. If he chose against God's will in the pre-mortal existence the consequences were eternal since there was no means provided to redeem until the state death came upon man.

But, I've already said that.

Agency and "free" agency seem to be different.

Definition of agency:

1 a: the office or function of an agent b: the relationship between a principal and that person's agent

2: the capacity, condition, or state of acting or of exerting power : operation

3: a person or thing through which power is exerted or an end is achieved : instrumentality <communicated through the agency of the ambassador>

4: an establishment engaged in doing business for another <an advertising agency>

5: an administrative division (as of a government) <the agency for consumer protection>

I do not see that choice is involved in agency. An agent is a conduit through which something else is acted. The only choice is if one becomes an agent of good or an agent of evil or as the scriptures testify a choice between life and death.

The Traveler

[JohnnyRudick]

Same here, Bro. Rudick.

. . .

BD War in Heaven

This term arises out of Rev. 12: 7 and refers to the conflict that took place in the premortal existence among the spirit children of God. The war was primarily over how and in what manner the plan of salvation would be administered to the forthcoming human family upon the earth. The issues involved such things as agency, how to gain salvation, and who should be the Redeemer. The war broke out because one-third of the spirits refused to accept the appointment of Jesus Christ as the Savior. Such a refusal was a rebellion against the Father’s plan of redemption. It was evident that if given agency, some persons would fall short of complete salvation; Lucifer and his followers wanted salvation to come automatically to all who passed through mortality, without regard to individual preference, agency, or voluntary dedication (see Isa. 14: 12-20; Luke 10: 18; Rev. 12: 4-13; D&C 29: 36-38; Moses 4: 1-4). The spirits who thus rebelled and persisted were thrust out of heaven and cast down to the earth without mortal bodies, “and thus came the devil and his angels” (D&C 29: 37; see also Rev. 12: 9; Abr. 3: 24-28).

I also propose Alma 43 and 44 is an exceptional play-by-play of the pre-mortal war in heaven. Just change the names. :)

Amen:)

[JohnnyRudick]

Those aren't dictionaries.

Also, one scripture reference that talks about choosing and another reference that contains the word agency do not a definition make.

One scripture you have is D&C 101:78. You have highlighted act and agency in the same verse. Very good. The dictionary says that agency is related to acting. But it does not say choice.

We get the idea that agency is the same as choice from the old protestant/philosophical term of "free agency" which describes a certain type of agency, without defining what agency itself means.

I would expect God knew and used the correct meaning of Agency from the dictionary. I do not think we should rely on protestantism or philosophy to define it for the Latter-day Saints.

Throughout history the way we use to define a word is the way it is first used in recorded history.

It's context.

I will try it without so much scripture this time.

The first usage of the word "agency" is used in the war in heaven.

Lucifer wants to take away man's agency that God had given him.

Then again it is used in the garden of Eden where God gave to Adam and eve their agency.

Some think the scripture contradicts itself.

Again it comes beck to rightly dividing.

Now I have covered this before but again I will go at it from a different angle.

We can be an agent to ourselves and we can be an agent for another person or animal.

God Gave us our agency.

We can give our agency to another. Give them the right to act in our name.

We cannot give anyone the right to act for themselves as we understand that the agency of man is God given.

Not so with everyone.

Not everyone believes that agency is God given.

Some think that it is Government given.

Other throughout History believed that you could own another man.

A man owned by another did not have his own agency.

He had no free agency.

He was owned by his master.

The Master could free him and give to him his agency.

Now he had the right to act on his own behalf.

To choose what he would do with his life.

God in the preexistence must have at the time of His plan to allow us to move on to our next level, gave to us our agency.

Before that we must have been "joined at the hip" with the gods and in particular our Father.

We fought a war because God gave us our agency.

We had power that the Father gave us to act on our own behalf. "because of their agency. . ."

Once placed on this earth in our new condition, we were once again in bondage to the Father.

Mind wiped perhaps, I don't know.

But God told Adam of every tree of the garden he could freely eat.

Giving him authority to name all the animals etc.

Free agency to act for himself in the garden.

But God had to give him a Law to abide by.

Freedom without restraints would not do.

"But of the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil. . ."

Now I differ from some here.

I do not see any restriction on eating of the Tree of Life.

"MOS 2:29 And I, God, said unto man:

Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth,

and every tree in the which shall be the fruit of a tree yielding seed;

to you it shall be for meat."

We could eat of every tree, vine, herb, etc.

So the Law was Not to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.

In this garden God Gave to "Man" their agency.

He set them free.

Just because He gave them a Law, that did not mean that they were not free to act for themselves.

This was the gift of "agency".

He allowed them to be agents to themselves.

The Scriptures are the best dictionaries ever if we don't close our minds to this function of them.

Bro. Rudick

Edited March 11, 2009 by JohnnyRudick
Spelling and afterthought;-)

[Webster]

JohnnyRudick:

I like much of what you just said. It tends to follow the definitions found for Agents and Agency in the dictionary. You talk about acting (one definition) and acting in another's behalf (another definition). Very good.

[Justice]

Lucifer wants to take away man's agency that God had given him.

Then again it is used in the garden of Eden where God gave to Adam and eve their agency.

Some think the scripture contradicts itself.

I think I can use these comments to state my belief more clearly.

You said Satan wanted to take away man's agency that God gave him. This is critical in understanding exactly what Satan wanted to do. Hear me out.

Man had agency in the pre-mortal existence. If it were not so, then 1/3 of the hosts of heaven could not have chosen against God, and as a result fallen.

Here it is again:

D&C 29:

36 And it came to pass that Adam, being tempted of the devil—for, behold, the devil was before Adam, for he rebelled against me, saying, Give me thine honor, which is my power; and also a third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away from me because of their agency;

I have not been able to find a scripture that says "God gave man his agency in the pre-mortal existence." In fact, I don't believe the agency spoken of here can be given. I believe it is an inherent right that is given to all children of God by virtue of where they are on the "food chain" when they are created (brought into existence or born). They can choose to act, and not be acted upon." It is based on intelligence.

Look how God says they fell, "because of their agency." I think God chose His words carefully here, so as not to say "the agency I gave them." It is like a child who has not reached the age of accountability. Their parents are responsible for their choices, so those parents are careful with what they "allow" their children to do. Because of their choice, either God had to kick them out of heaven, or He Himself would cease to be God. He could not allow this type of "use of agency," namely one that chose against the eternally given way that "God" exalts His children. He could not allow another way, because there was only one way that it will work. That being the plan He presented. And, they exercised this type of agency without the "safety net" of the creation, fall, and atonement.

Now, on earth:

Moses 7:

32 The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency;

See, God says he gave man (when he created them) their knowledge. He doesn't say He gave us our agency until we were in the Garden of Eden.

The entire plan included a "place, space, or time" that man could dwell in (called death, or separation from God) where man could exercise his agency freely. What God is saying here is, "The place and time is prepared. If you choose to sin when in the Garden, the fall will cause death and I can redeem you from death, so long as you choose to return to me while you are dead. So, I now give it to you to exercise your agency freely... and safely"

The "agency" Satan wanted to destroy was NOT the inherent agency that comes to all God's children. Satan himself used that agency to choose. He wanted to prevent the "mortal probation," or place that God prepared for man to exercise their agency freely.

He thought if man (Eve) would immediately partake of the tree of life after he partook of the first fruit, there would be no need for it. This is what I have been trying to explain. Why Satan's plan made sense was that God wanted man to partake of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, and then partake of the fruit of the tree of life ALSO. Satan said, WOAH! The tree of life is available RIGHT THERE! RIGHT AWAY! All we have to do is have Eve partake of it immediately after, and then:

I will go to earth and show everyone evil, but force them to choose good.

But, Father, in order to do that, I need you to give their agency to me.

He thought this would eliminate the need for an atonement because:

1) all men would be born immortal

2) there would be no sin

So, BOTH criteria were now met through Satan's plan also, because all his plan was was God's plan, up until Eve ate the forbidden fruit. Look, with Satan's plan, both critera were also met:

1) all have a physical body

2) all have the knowledge of good and evil

Plus, ALL are already immortal, no need for a rersurrection; and no one will sin, so no need for this mortal probation period for man to repent.

All the scriptures I have listed in this thread are my attempt to show this in the scriptures.

Also, I have tried to use sound logic in presenting my case.

I welcome holes in my logic, and where I misunderstand the scriptures I have quoted.

Does this help you understand me? Or, is it still clear as mud?

[JohnnyRudick]

I think I can use these comments to state my belief more clearly.

You said Satan wanted to take away man's agency that God gave him. This is critical in understanding exactly what Satan wanted to do. Hear me out.

Man had agency in the pre-mortal existence. If it were not so, then 1/3 of the hosts of heaven could not have chosen against God, and as a result fallen.

Here it is again:

D&C 29:

36 And it came to pass that Adam, being tempted of the devil—for, behold, the devil was before Adam, for he rebelled against me, saying, Give me thine honor, which is my power; and also a third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away from me because of their agency;

I have not been able to find a scripture that says "God gave man his agency in the pre-mortal existence." In fact, I don't believe the agency spoken of here can be given. I believe it is an inherent right that is given to all children of God by virtue of where they are on the "food chain" when they are created (brought into existence or born). They can choose to act, and not be acted upon." It is based on intelligence.

Look how God says they fell, "because of their agency." I think God chose His words carefully here, so as not to say "the agency I gave them." It is like a child who has not reached the age of accountability. Their parents are responsible for their choices, so those parents are careful with what they "allow" their children to do. Because of their choice, either God had to kick them out of heaven, or He Himself would cease to be God. He could not allow this type of "use of agency," namely one that chose against the eternally given way that "God" exalts His children. He could not allow another way, because there was only one way that it will work. That being the plan He presented. And, they exercised this type of agency without the "safety net" of the creation, fall, and atonement. . . still clear as mud?

36 And it came to pass that Adam, being tempted of the devil—for, behold, the devil was before Adam, for he rebelled against me, saying, Give me thine honor, which is my power; and also a third part of the hosts of heaven turned he away from me because of their agency;

"because of their agency" can also be taken to mean that they would not have been able to turn if God had not given them their agency.

Lucifer rebelled against God in the pre-existence before Eden was set up when the Father said "I will send the First."

It was then that He became angry and turned against God.

Before that he only wanted to save all.

Universal Salvation.

After Father chose Jehovah, Satan then sought to destroy the Father's plan.

Yes, the Father gave us our agency twice.

So far.

Bro. Rudick

[JohnnyRudick]

I think I can use these comments to state my belief more clearly.

Moses 7:

32 The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency;

See, God says he gave man (when he created them) their knowledge. He doesn't say He gave us our agency until we were in the Garden of Eden.

Hummmmmmmmmm.

OK:)

[Justice]

It was then that He became angry and turned against God.

Bro. Rudick

I also have a scripture and logic based theory as to why Lucifer got so mad, and why he continues to be mad today, and why he will be mad forever... so mad in fact that he chose to be separated from God and became anti-Christ, not just anti-Father.

This is one of those things I said I would rather not present in an open forum.

If you're curious to hear my theory, send me a PM and I'll try to explain.

[Gillebre]

Satan's plan was never to save us. It was a ruse from the beginning to draw more spirit children of God to his cause, as many as he could, before he was cast out.

Satan only claimed his plan was to save us, save everyone, so that when the Father didn't go with Satan's plan, and some would be lost, people would side with Satan and thus he'd have more people to rule over in hell.

Furthermore, Satan never had any intention of keeping his first estate, keeping the commandments, and one day becoming an exalted, resurrected being. That is because he knew he couldn't live that kind of life that was required of him as a god, perfect. The only other way to get the power he wanted, or something close to it, without having to do all the work and effort that's needed to prepare for exaltation, was to be cast out and become the devil...where he'd tempt his former brothers and sisters into sin so he could rule over them.

That whole anger thing in the Grand Council was an act put on by the father of all lies, to get the support and following of as many spirit children of God as he could before he was no longer welcome in the divine realms of Heavenly Father.

Edited March 13, 2009 by Gillebre

[Justice]

Excellent.

So far, we've all been talking about Satan's plan, but we haven't discussed his reasons for his plan in depth.

Very interesting comments. If they have been revealed to you, then they are remarkable indeed. I never considered he never had any intentions of keeping his first estate. I'll have to study, ponder and pray about that one so I can come to know it too.

But, I will add one thing to your comments, I don't believe the anger was an act. If someone is "acting" angry then they can't hold out very long. Lucifer was not acting, in my opinion, and if you're curious as to why I feel that way, PM me and I'll share.

But, I really never thought about why Lucifer did what he did. I have always concentrated on figuring out what he did. I've always assumed his intentions were that if he got enough of Father's children to follow him then Father would change his mind and do it his way. It never occured to me that he may not have even wanted to be saved, knowing he couldn't do it.

I wonder if in the pre-mortal existence, in our innocent state, if we really knew what it would be like to be obedient with a physical body and with opposition. The only way we could come to know we could was by relying on Heavenly Father and having faith in His words. Kinda sounds familiar, huh? I lean toward thinking Lucifer wanted to save everyone. That's what I have read the most from prophets and apostles. But, that's certainly an interesting thought. I'm confident that is his goal now, but will need to study to see if it was his goal then also.

[JohnnyRudick]

Satan's plan was never to save us. It was a ruse from the beginning to draw more spirit children of God to his cause, as many as he could, before he was cast out.

Satan only claimed his plan was to save us, save everyone, so that when the Father didn't go with Satan's plan, and some would be lost, people would side with Satan and thus he'd have more people to rule over in hell.

Furthermore, Satan never had any intention of keeping his first estate, keeping the commandments, and one day becoming an exalted, resurrected being. That is because he knew he couldn't live that kind of life that was required of him as a god, perfect. The only other way to get the power he wanted, or something close to it, without having to do all the work and effort that's needed to prepare for exaltation, was to be cast out and become the devil...where he'd tempt his former brothers and sisters into sin so he could rule over them.

That whole anger thing in the Grand Council was an act put on by the father of all lies, to get the support and following of as many spirit children of God as he could before he was no longer welcome in the divine realms of Heavenly Father.

Remember.

Lucifer we are not told that was "angry" until he was told he would mot be sent to redeem all mankind.

I get confused these days but I like Bro. "Vort", I still try to stick with the Scriptures.

When the Father announced He would "send the First";

It was then that he was angry and drew a third of the stars of Heaven.

From then on I agree with you.

He did not care if he saved one soul or not.

Bro. Rudick

[MormonGirl02]

I honestly don't know. Interesting thread though. :)

[Webster]

Satan's plan was never to save us. It was a ruse from the beginning to draw more spirit children of God to his cause, as many as he could, before he was cast out.

Satan only claimed his plan was to save us, save everyone, so that when the Father didn't go with Satan's plan, and some would be lost, people would side with Satan and thus he'd have more people to rule over in hell.

Furthermore, Satan never had any intention of keeping his first estate, keeping the commandments, and one day becoming an exalted, resurrected being. That is because he knew he couldn't live that kind of life that was required of him as a god, perfect. The only other way to get the power he wanted, or something close to it, without having to do all the work and effort that's needed to prepare for exaltation, was to be cast out and become the devil...where he'd tempt his former brothers and sisters into sin so he could rule over them.

That whole anger thing in the Grand Council was an act put on by the father of all lies, to get the support and following of as many spirit children of God as he could before he was no longer welcome in the divine realms of Heavenly Father.

One question to better understand your view: God said that Satan sought to destroy the agency of man. How does what you've said above do that? It seems that opposition and temptation are needed for agency to work, so the above seems (to me) to enhance or make agency possible rather than destroy it.

[Gillebre]

That would have been the result of the plan Satan presented, had it been given divine approval - the destruction of agency. and i'm sure that Satan would have loved such a plan because it meant he'd get God's glory, everyone would depend on him. In my opinion, Satan is not a dumb person. He's very intelligent and cunning, and I don't honestly think he believed his plan would get approved (not even he was that deluded, imo), the core of it being itself a contradiction of divine law (ie. agency). I believe that Satan, while outwardly saying his plan was to save all, knew that his only way of achieving the kind of power he wanted was to become the tempter. and while Satan certainly thought he had it scoped out, and I understand where it could be thought he was simply ignorant of the true divine workings of the plan, I have come to attribute more to him as having his own path/plan to power over others from the get-go. So while I can easily see where the former perspective can be found (Satan being ignorant and accidentally playing an important part in the plan..the fall, temptation, etc..), myself I lean more towards the idea that his real plan from the start was, as i said, to lead many souls away so that their agency would be lost, and he'd rule over them. While what you said Webster is correct that Satan sought to destroy agency, I think he knew the only way he could was in the end (see below). When the judgment comes and the Sons of Perdition are cast out with Satan and his angels to darkness, all who went with him effectively lose their agency once and for all, they having given it up to follow him. At the end, Satan succeeded in the fact that those who followed him had their agency destroyed, as they let themselves be ruled by him, and where they're going.....Satan is the master, and what he says, gos.

That's my view, anyhow. :) I don't pretend to know that it's what really happened or how Satan really is...I just have a hard time believing he was as ignorant of divine workings as perhaps we might think (i mean, he was a son of the morning, an angel in authority in the presence of God). And as God said, I believe, Satan was a liar from the start. I only share my thoughts with you guys so at the very least, you'd think about the motivation and deeper things behind Satan's actions, as well as what he did, etc... If they're wrong, then I guess I'll be changing what I think someday. :)

Edited March 13, 2009 by Gillebre

[Justice]

What about those who say Satan came to earth to fulfill his plan.

Afterall, and as I have stated in this thread already, if his only purpose was to destroy God's plan, all he had to do was not tempt Eve.

But, he did tempt Eve, which tells me he was still trying to accomplish his designs.

[Webster]

Gillebre:

1) Most people would say that Satan sought to destroy agency so that his 'plan' to save all would work.

2) Some might say that the implementation of his 'plan' to save all would have resulted in the destruction of agency.

3) You are saying (correct me if I'm wrong) that Satan was seeking for power by purposefully becoming God's adversary and intentionally lying in an attempt to draw away followers after him. Therefore, he did not necessarily seek to destroy the agency of men in a general sense (since he probably did not believe or expect he could deceive all of God's children), but he did seek to destroy (and actually did destroy) the agency of those whom he deceived into following him, since they are now in bondage to him and follow his will.

[Gillebre]

Well, if what I've said has any truth to it, which it could or couldn't...how it really went down in Heaven I don't know for certain, then Satan 'coming to earth' (being cast out) was just the next step in his own plan to have power.

And yes, if he wanted to destroy the Plan, he'd just avoid tempting Eve. However, because he did tempt her, that means he has people to rule over when he is finally cast into outer darkness.

I agree with what you've said, Justice. :)

(whether or not your post was directed at me, i couldn't really tell...sorry. lol! my brain's been multi-tasking with anxiety with this junk involving my brother, infections, and hospitals..anyone got some prayers they could utter for my family in the meantime? :) thanks. lol)

Edited after I saw Webster's post:

1) If agency could have been subdued so that his plan would work, I'm sure he might have tried going about it differently. However, in my opinion, agency is something that can't be destroyed by anyone unless the person losing their agency is willing...so I don't think his plan could work because agency is eternal (imo).

2) Yes

3) Basically. Yes. I think Satan knew that he couldn't get the kind of power he wanted through exaltation (simply because power in exaltation is pure and holy..which Satan isn't), and went for it the way he knew how......by being the devil as you said.

Edited March 13, 2009 by Gillebre

[JohnnyRudick]

This is turning into a more Covert plan then I can get my mind wrapped around but I'm trying:-)

[Guest tomk]

Of one thing we can be sure -- what Satan proposed and fought for never would have worked, and was a lie. Satan only cares about ONE thing: himself.