God Allowing Satan to Tempt: An Act of Mercy

[Finrock]

Greetings to all who read this! :)

When considering the act of choosing between good and evil choices, I've wondered in the past, that, "If there were no Satan would we ever choose evil?" In answer to this question, I'm inclined to say, yes. Even without Satan or an entity to tempt us, it is possible, and likely, that we would choose to do evil. So, Satan is not a requirement in order for evil to exist. If this is true (and I'm certain that it is), then it might cause us to ask, "Why did God place Satan here on earth to tempt us?" If we can already sin without any "help", it may seem at first that it isn't very merciful of God to allow an entity to roam the earth who through tempting us to do evil increases the likelihood of us doing evil.

However, I believe that by allowing Satan to tempt us, God is acting in mercy towards us. My reason is very simple. In our condition now, when Satan tempts us, we can choose to resist his temptation and we are accountable for our evil choices. On the other hand, how much more accountable would we be if we choose to do evil in the absence of any influence encouraging us to do so? In other words, even though we are currently accountable for our choices, it is certainly "easier" to give in to evil desires when you have a "cheerleading squad" encouraging you on. I think the fact that Satan is allowed to tempt us gives God more leeway in exercising His mercy towards us, understanding that we are in an environment where not only do we have a natural capacity to do wickedly but where we are also constantly being tempted to do wickedly. On the other hand, God would have less leeway to exercise mercy if without any external encouragement we chose wickedness solely based on our desires for wickedness. Even without Satan none of us would be able to live perfect lives and thus we would be subject to a greater condemnation.

What do you guys think?

Regards,

Finrock

Edited April 9, 2010 by Finrock
Changed wording for clarification. Grammar fixes.

[JudoMinja]

I will have to respectfully disagree with you Finrock. While your explanation is wonderful, and I think it does play into things somewhat, I do not think we would sin without Satan's influence. And here is my explanation to back that up-

We all have within us the ability to discern good from evil, right from wrong, and we all do what makes us happy. Ultimate happiness comes from doing what is right and good. The fruits of righteous actions are easily seen, and we learn from seeing that fruit. The natural desire to sin (natural man) would be easily curbed as we are exposed to a strictly positive influence. Blessings come from doing what's right, happiness and joy comes from doing what's right.

It is Satan who makes sin appear good. He creates enticing falsehoods that mimic the joy we receive from doing what's right. He shades the truth by mimicing happiness with pleasure, joy with satisfaction, love with lust. His counterfits are hardly fulfilling, but he is very skilled at making it appear better than that received from doing what is truly good. He is a crafty worker of darkness, and it is because of his influence that so many do not recognize the horridness of the decisions we've made until it is too late.

Think of a seriously debated topic like... global warming just for sake of an example. If all you ever hear is arguments FOR global warming, you will side for it as well. If all you ever hear is arguments AGAINST global warming, you will side against it too. It is only when you hear both sides that you are truly able to make a decision. Now, you can compare their arguments, find the fallacies in their logic, and determine where you stand.

This is why God allows Satan to tempt us. We NEED the temptation. We need to see both sides, good and evil. We need the opposition so that we may have the ability to make our own conscious decision. It is an act of mercy that God allows Satan to tempt us, because without this temptation we would not feel the influence to do evil, we would not be presented with an equal playing field, and our decision to do good would count for naught, because we had nothing to compare it to.

[Traveler]

I do not think that we would choose evil without two elements present:

The first element is the presents of Satan to beguile us. This means that we must be falsely convinced or enticed to sin before we would choose it. In this Satan has the advantage because our 5 physical senses dominate our attention.

The second element is the veil that removes all remembrance of who we are and what we achieved prior to our coming to mortality. Without this spiritual knowledge our only connection is by faith and faith in temporal condition is uncertain. Again Satan has the advantage.

If we were about choosing evil without Satan beguiling us we would have done so in our first estate.

The Traveler

[Moksha]

I believe that by allowing Satan to tempt us, God is acting in mercy towards us.

What do you guys think?

Regards,

Finrock

I think it would be best if he lead us not into temptation, but delivered us from evil, just the same as when He forgives us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.

[Dravin]

I will have to respectfully disagree with you Finrock. While your explanation is wonderful, and I think it does play into things somewhat, I do not think we would sin without Satan's influence.

Then does it stand to reason that there was someone to tempt Satan? And someone to tempt the person who tempted Satan? And so on down a line of infinite tempters?

[JudoMinja]

Then does it stand to reason that there was someone to tempt Satan? And someone to tempt the person who tempted Satan? And so on down a line of infinite tempters?

Hmm... you make a good point. All I can say to that is I don't know. And with some more thought, I may rethink my viewpoint on this.

[MarginOfError]

Finrock may be relieved to find that there is a topic on which he and I agree

Judo, as Dravin pointed out, if an external influence is required for us to sin, then who tempted Lucifer?

I've spent many hours thinking about this one, and it seems to me that we very much do have the ability to choose wickedness without any external influence. Our own pride, desire, and self-interest are plenty to get us to make poor choices.

There is evidence of this in the dialog between God and and Lucifer in the endowment, but as it does not appear in our scriptures, I will not recite it here. But the key elements is that Lucifer wanted more than anything to be God, and of his own volition made decisions to try and take God's place (both in the Council in Heaven and in the Garden of Eden).

In that same vein, I think we also give Satan far too much credit for our own decisions. I don't think he (or his minions) have nearly as much influence or persuasive power over us as we sometimes portray. And Satan seems to me like he'd be too smart to focus on individuals like that anyway. He'd have much more success focusing on charismatic people who were capable of leading away a handful (or more) of people with them.

[Guest mormonmusic]

Finrock's argument appears to be this -- God can be more merciful to us because our sins are the result of "etenuating circumstances" due to the provocation of Satan.

Not sure I agree with this. Ultimately, he wants you to have perfect character, and that character change has to be achieved whether Satan is present or not.

I think mercy is only embodied in sending His Son to atone for our sins so we don't have to suffer for these sins ourselves.

[marts1]

There is scripture somewhere that says other worlds do not have evil spirits present, I just forget where.

I think along the same lines. You can look on the negative influences of evil here, if fought against, as an excellerent on your way to perfection.

[Traveler]

....

Judo, as Dravin pointed out, if an external influence is required for us to sin, then who tempted Lucifer?

I've spent many hours thinking about this one, and it seems to me that we very much do have the ability to choose wickedness without any external influence. Our own pride, desire, and self-interest are plenty to get us to make poor choices.

....

I would point out that there is a radical difference between the choice Lucifer made in the pre-existence to become Satan and our “poor” uninformed choices to experiment with evil in this life. Lucifer made his choice with full exposure to truth and the consequence of his choice. Our “poor” choices here are more along the line of stupid, ignorant uninformed attempts of experimentation with evil – something likely that we will at some point regret.

My line of thinking also introduces the possibility of repentance. If evil was a real un-influenced choice – why would there be repentance and the likelihood that we would ever change what really is our (by ourself) choice? If the choice is different – what caused the difference?

I submit to you that the reason Satan is excluded from repentance is because he made a real and honest choice – the reason we can repent is because we were tricked into a poor choice. (See D&C 93:31) It would appear that at some time the essence of our individuality will manifest itself in what really is our choice and that choice will stand unaltered and unchanged forever.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

I would also add to this discussion the very meaning of agency. Although we think of agency as a choice that is not the real and complete meaning of agency. If it was - the word would be choice and not agency.

The very word agency implies that our "choice" if you will is nothing more that aligning ourselves with an already existing entity. We cannot align ourselves with something that does not influence us. The scriptures are very clear – if we do not choose G-d that we will be forever under the influence of Satan. The idea that we can choose to exclude both, being independent of one and the other is an illusion and completely incorrect – a downright lie if you will.

The Traveler

[ryanh]

We all had the agency before coming to earth to choose good or evil. Lucifer is the obvious example of that. The third part that also chose to rebel against Father's plan also illustrates it. Just because we have a veil placed between us and our memory doesn't mean that our fundamental ability to choose for ourselves has changed.

Finrock, I think your scenario simplifies too much the ability of God to judge. If He is omnipotent, and knows the thoughts and intents of our hearts, what is to prevent Him from judging between 'succumbed to temptation' and 'chose of free will to sin'? Just because there is the existence of extenuating circumstances does not preclude the ability to discern.

I do not believe temptation by an adversary is for the purpose of mercy. Mercy could exist exclusively of such circumstances. I feel the presence of temptation is far more about growth, and opportunity to prove oneself. God doesn't need this temporal existence to understand who and what we are made of. This estate is to progress and, IMO, to prove to ourselves that our final estate is just.

[Wisc]

!. WIthout Satan we would STILL sin. Because "sin" doesnt have to mean "evil" it just has to be less than perfect. Speeding down the highway? SIN. Have a near miss on the highway with a Semi and shout a curse word out of fear? SIN. Accidently have a less than chaste thought flash through your head about the nice back side of the hot girl that just walked by before quickly thinking of a hymn and repenting? SIN

In none of these cases did the Devil have ANYTHING to do with you sinning.

2. We are all children of God. Same "bloodline" if you will. All from the same place. If Satan can sin without being tempted by another devil than so can we. No one beguiled Satan into rebelling against the Lord. No snake met him in some garden and tempted him to partake of forbidden fruit. Therefore it is reasonable to agree that the rest of us could sin all on our own too. But we have the added delema of having a tempter.

3. I see the existance of Satan as an act of purpose more than mercy. While I do see where the original poster is comming from and even agree with some of his concepts, I feel that the reason we have a Devil is the same reason we have night vs day. Opposition in all things. If the sun never set and we had to just determon by our clocks what was "night" vs day we would struggle a lot more than we do having a clear daytime and night. Jesus is the sun or day symbolic of good; and Satan is the night, evil

[Seminarysnoozer]

I think Satan's direct action in our lives is similar to the quantity of direct action God has in our lives (in general). Yes, he can directly act in someones life but it isn't necessary, anymore than it is necessary for God to visit me personally and act in my life. "Satan" is the physical representation of the direction we would head if we made evil choices in life, just like God is the physical representation of the direction we will head if we make good choices. That's all Satan has to be, is an enticing representation of that direction.

I think the presence of an adversary is to create the spectrum that is formed by having two ends. The final judgment, in part, will be based on what "image" we were aiming for in any given choice in our lives. i.e. - I worked hard in school so I could make lots of money and be famous and powerful, or I worked hard in school so I could learn about God's creation and provide for my family. There may be parts of both ends of desires of the heart which creates the potential for "many mansions" in the kingdom, not just a "heaven or hell" choice.

If the test was just a test of skill and ability then all one would need is one goal to shoot for, perfection. There could still be varied results of that system, depending on how far one fell short of perfection but then it wouldn't be a test of purpose as there is only one goal to aim for. But because this is a test of 'desires of the heart' or the reasons why we do the things we do, then we need two ends of the spectrum.

[Finrock]

Hello ryanh. Nice to meet you! :)

We all had the agency before coming to earth to choose good or evil. Lucifer is the obvious example of that. The third part that also chose to rebel against Father's plan also illustrates it. Just because we have a veil placed between us and our memory doesn't mean that our fundamental ability to choose for ourselves has changed.

Yeah, I think so too.

Finrock, I think your scenario simplifies too much the ability of God to judge. If He is omnipotent, and knows the thoughts and intents of our hearts, what is to prevent Him from judging between 'succumbed to temptation' and 'chose of free will to sin'? Just because there is the existence of extenuating circumstances does not preclude the ability to discern.

I don't think I made the point that the existence of extenuating circumstances precludes the ability to discern. But, perhaps you are making a point independent of what I was saying?

Anyways, I'm not sure I agree with your understanding of omniscience (btw, you typed omnipotent, but I'm pretty sure you mean omniscience) but that is a different discussion altogether.

I do not believe temptation by an adversary is for the purpose of mercy. Mercy could exist exclusively of such circumstances. I feel the presence of temptation is far more about growth, and opportunity to prove oneself. God doesn't need this temporal existence to understand who and what we are made of. This estate is to progress and, IMO, to prove to ourselves that our final estate is just.

I agree. Mercy does exist independent of an adversary. I, at least, wasn't suggesting otherwise in my post. I was suggesting that it was an act of mercy, not that it resulted in the creation of mercy. I think temptation and adversary are not always the same thing. I think we can be tempted without an adversary. But, I also think that another purpose of having an Adversary is to assist us towards godhood when we learn to not listen to him. So, to clarify, I am not claiming that my OP is the exclusive reason for having an adversary, but perhaps one reason.

Regards,

Finrock

Edited April 10, 2010 by Finrock
Fixed mistake in text.

[Finrock]

Based on our understanding of preexistence it seems to me that we have had the capacity to choose evil over good even without an entity to tempt us. As has been mentioned already, at least Lucifer chose wickedly on his own accord. Now it's possible that so did some of the other 1/3 of the host of heaven, but I suppose it could be argued that Lucifer "persuaded" them to join him. In any case, one example is sufficient to establish that no adversary is necessary in order for evil to exist.

Another clue that we have is found in 2 Nephi. I'll quote what I feel are the relevant verses and discuss them below:

"11 For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my first-born in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility.

12 Wherefore, it must needs have been created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no purpose in the end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing must needs destroy the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God.

13 And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away" (2 Nephi 2, Emphasis added).

First, notice in verse 11 it states that there must be an opposition in all things. So, opposition must exist if there is to be goodness, evil, holiness, etc. Without opposition, then we would, "...have been created for a thing of naught" as Lehi states.

Second, notice in verse 13 it establishes the reason for sin. Before I go further let me establish the relationship between sin and wickedness. Here is how the Church defines sin and wickedness in the Guide to the Scriptures:

Sin - "Willful disobedience to God’s commandments."

Wickedness - "Evil, iniquity; to be disobedient to God’s commandments."

So, sin is wickedness and wickedness is evil. We can say then that verse 13 establishes the reason for evil, and it is really quite simple. It says, and I paraphrase (substituting sin with evil because they are the same thing), "If there is no law, then there is no evil." In other words, evil exist because there is a law. Evil is simply the opposition to eternal laws or laws that God has established. Satan is not the creator of evil. Evil exist because there are eternal laws and as free agents we can choose between the two. So any act of choosing in opposition to eternal laws is a wicked act. In short, a devil is not necessary in order for evil to exist.

Now, my thoughts on this are actually an application of a principle I learned from another scripture regarding faith, but I will post an explanation of that later.

Thanks to everyone who has contributed so far. I appreciate the thoughts, even the ones I may not necessarily agree with.

Regards,

Finrock

[Finrock]

Hello MarginOfError! :)

Finrock may be relieved to find that there is a topic on which he and I agree

In truth this wouldn't be the first one. At least not the first topic that I have agreed with you on.

In that same vein, I think we also give Satan far too much credit for our own decisions. I don't think he (or his minions) have nearly as much influence or persuasive power over us as we sometimes portray.

I agree. I don't think LDS "blame" Satan for their actions, but I think there is a sentiment that, "If it weren't for the devil I wouldn't do evil." I think the devil can only persuade us to act on desires we already have in our hearts. Without those desires, there would be no evil there to temp us with.

Here is something interesting I read under the topic "Devils" in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism:

"People could not demonstrate their love of God and their willingness to do the work of righteousness sufficiently to qualify them for exaltation unless they were subject to, and able to overcome, evil and devil adversaries, such as Satan and his hosts" (Source, Emphasis is original).

Although I don't think this excludes my view, I do also believe that this is likely one of the main reasons why Satan was allowed to tempt us, but what I wanted to make note of is that this article makes a distinction between evil and devil adversaries.

Regards,

Finrock

[Snow]

Greetings to all who read this! :)

When considering the act of choosing between good and evil choices, I've wondered in the past, that, "If there were no Satan would we ever choose evil?" In answer to this question, I'm inclined to say, yes. Even without Satan or an entity to tempt us, it is possible, and likely, that we would choose to do evil. So, Satan is not a requirement in order for evil to exist. If this is true (and I'm certain that it is), then it might cause us to ask, "Why did God place Satan here on earth to tempt us?" If we can already sin without any "help", it may seem at first that it isn't very merciful of God to allow an entity to roam the earth who through tempting us to do evil increases the likelihood of us doing evil.

However, I believe that by allowing Satan to tempt us, God is acting in mercy towards us. My reason is very simple. In our condition now, when Satan tempts us, we can choose to resist his temptation and we are accountable for our evil choices. On the other hand, how much more accountable would we be if we choose to do evil in the absence of any influence encouraging us to do so? In other words, even though we are currently accountable for our choices, it is certainly "easier" to give in to evil desires when you have a "cheerleading squad" encouraging you on. I think the fact that Satan is allowed to tempt us gives God more leeway in exercising His mercy towards us, understanding that we are in an environment where not only do we have a natural capacity to do wickedly but where we are also constantly being tempted to do wickedly. On the other hand, God would have less leeway to exercise mercy if without any external encouragement we chose wickedness solely based on our desires for wickedness. Even without Satan none of us would be able to live perfect lives and thus we would be subject to a greater condemnation.

What do you guys think?

Regards,

Finrock

And how do you think it is that Satan tempts us? By what mechanism?

Microwaves?

Gamma radiation?

Gravity?

[MarginOfError]

And how do you think it is that Satan tempts us? By what mechanism?

Microwaves?

Gamma radiation?

Gravity?

I think he uses finger puppets.

[Dravin]

I think he uses finger puppets.

Exhibit A:

[GADBabaganoosh]

I simply don't think it would be fair. If we have an influence for good, without another influence, there really isn't a choice because there is only one influence. So Satan's influence is a necessary counterbalance to Gods, that we can be influenced in an equal manner, and thus be judged fairly for our actions.

[Finrock]

Good afternoon Snow. I hope you are enjoying your weekend! :)

And how do you think it is that Satan tempts us? By what mechanism?

Microwaves?

Gamma radiation?

Gravity?

Out of the options given to me, I'll choose Gamma radiation.

Regards,

Finrock

[Snow]

Good afternoon Snow. I hope you are enjoying your weekend! :)

Out of the options given to me, I'll choose Gamma radiation.

Regards,

Finrock

Seriously - if you believe that Satan tempts you, how does he do it?

[JudoMinja]

Hmm, after reading what has been posted thus far and giving it some thought, here is my revised (still open to change) opinion on this subject.

I still believe that Satan's influence is a NECESSARY counter-balance to God's but my reasoning behind that necessity has changed. Of course, we are capable of sinning and choosing evil without Satan's influence, as has been pointed out to me with logic I had not previously ascertained with my own faculties. Lucifer did so in the pre-existance, without any outside influence, which means even without our bodies or the desires of the "natural man" we have the ability to feel pride, greed, etc and make unrighteous choices.

However, we also made a choice in that pre-existance, as Lucifer did, only for the opposite team. We chose to follow Christ, and coming here was part of that choice. That means our uninfluenced spirits are already geared toward righteous choices. Without the influence of Satan we will choose righteousness, not because we CAN'T choose otherwise, but because we WILL.

This is a great testament to the worth of every soul to walk the earth. We were all strong enough to make this decision to come here, to follow Christ's plan, to submit our will to that of the Father, and we all desire to return to Him. We all desire truth and righteousness, and the happiness that follows, MORE than the seeming "freedom" (to rebel against God) offered in following Lucifer.

As we are already predispositioned for good, without the veil and Satan's influence, our choice to choose good wouldn't be much of a choice, as we've already decided. So, the whole point of this life is not really to see if we will choose good (because we already did), but to see if we can stick to that choice when we are drowning in murky waters under the heavy influence to choose evil.

It is fairly easy to choose to live righteously when you have full support, full awareness, and full understanding of that choice. It is much harder when you are wading through challenges that seem overbearing, challenges that make evil seem not-so-bad, even good, perhaps necessary to get through your hardships. Our time here is a time to push our limits, strengthen our character, heighten our resolve, and help us turn to the Lord with full faith and trust when all hope seems lost.

Edited April 11, 2010 by JudoMinja
grammatical errors

[Finrock]

Hey Snow! :)

Seriously - if you believe that Satan tempts you, how does he do it?

Well, Gamma radiation seems as good as any other option because I have no idea how the actual process works. It seems in the garden Satan pretty much just used auditory language to persuade Adam and Eve. Outside of the garden, well, if I were to speculate, maybe God has allowed devils be able to influence our hearts in a limited capacity perhaps using the same mechanism the Holy Spirit does to influence us, albeit the Spirit has no limitations. In fact, I don't even know what the actual mechanism is that the Holy Spirit uses to communicate to us and influence us. So, I guess my answer is pretty much worthless. Sorry, I think my first answer was better...

Gamma radiation.

Regards,

Finrock