I need help with this discussion I was having

[Gabrielle]

So a friend of mine and I were talking about Satan ( She is not Catholic btw). At some pint of the discussion her ideas got kind of weird. She told me that the devil had no free will and that he was an archangel. Now, I know this isn’t true so when she was done speaking, I was like “ Hmmm, well that’s interesting but you know, I believe he does have free will and that he was a Seraph”. Now, she told me that in the Bible it said he was an archangel, and I asked where. Obviously it doesn’t, but I also couldn’t find anything that said he was a Seraph. This brings me to my first question, how is it that we as Catholics know that he was indeed a Seraph?

My next question comes from her argument that he had no free will. She said he was created to love and worship God ( which we both agreed on) , but according to her this means he has no will of his own since he was created with that purpose. My argument was, well, we are created for that purpose too, and we have free will. She came back with the argument that we were created with the purpose of having dominion over the earth ( she gets this from Genesis she says) not necessarily to love God. She says that this has something to do with the fall. Now, bear with me because here’s where I got lost too. Apparently, she believes that Adam and Eve didn’t have free will because God told them that they were not supposed to eat of the tree. I replied that I believe this in itself implies their free will. Not just because of the existence of the tree, which provided them with the opportunity to choose to eat it or not, but because a comand not to do something in itself implies the ability to carry out such a thing. She said no, and then I gave the example of the 10 comments. I said, here God also gives us 10 commands but we obviously have the freedom to not follow them. To this she replied that we are no longer under the law but under grace, which means we don’t have follow the 10 commandments. I pointed out the passage in the Gospel where Jesus said he did not cone to abolish the law and the prophets, to which she said that Our Lord was still under the law when He said that, but that after his death that was no longer the case?

She said she wanted to pick up the conversation where it left off, but I am completely at a loss. I mean, where in the Bible, and in which additional documents can I find good solid answers for this? Also, she doesn’t believe in Sola Scriptura.

Help

 

[Dan_Defender]

This brings me to my first question, how is it that we as Catholics know that he was indeed a Seraph?

We don’t know that Satan was a Seraphim or chief of the Seraphim. It has been speculated yes, but nobody knows for sure.

 

[Gabrielle]

So basically, it’s just tradition?

 

[Dan_Defender]

Not even. Just the opinion of some theologians.

 

[Gabrielle]

Well, I did not know that. Thank you! But it is also not known that he was an archangel right? Nowhere does it say that he belonged to any one of the choirs of angels.

 

[Dan_Defender]

What we know comes from Revelation:
‘And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world – he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.’ Rev 12:9
So he has wicked angels under him so he is the leader of the group. But what exactly was he? we don’t know

 

[Dan_Defender]

Apparently, she believes that Adam and Eve didn’t have free will because God told them that they were not supposed to eat of the tree.

Your friend is confusing things here. Because the tree contained the knowledge of good and evil. The fact is, God gave a command, and they disobeyed. Therefore, they had free will. We are all created with free will. They committed a sin. Nobody commits a sin unless they have free will. It is obvious.

 

[Gabrielle]

That is exactly what she said! She said that since the tree had the knowledge of good and evil it meant they didn’t so since they didn’t know they had no will!

 

[Dan_Defender]

Well she is wrong. Adam and Eve always had free will otherwise how could they disobey? But by eating the fruit, their knowledge increased, so they became more aware of everything around them, they felt shame and undue fear of God, which they didn’t before.

 

[guanophore]

Nobody commits a sin unless they have free will. It is obvious.

Actually this individual seems to have been contaminated with Calvanism. Calvin taught double pre-destination, that some are destined for heaven, and others for hell. He taught that the image of God in humans is not “wounded”, but killed by original sin, such that humans are complete slaves to sin, and can no longer exercise free will.

That is exactly what she said! She said that since the tree had the knowledge of good and evil it meant they didn’t so since they didn’t know they had no will!

The problem with this is that there are so many other passages of Scripture that make it clear they DID have free will.

 

[Gabrielle]

Right, and yes, I also noticed a few comments that made me think of Calvin. For example, she said that when Adam and Eve sinned their relationship with God was completely destroyed. I always thought it had just been badly wounded. We can’t be completely separated from God until we are in hell ( correct? Please correct me if I’m wrong). Now, she also mentioned something that I thought was interesting. She spoke to me about how she lived a life of sin when she was young, but that at the time she didn’t have free will because she didn’t have “ a personal relationship with Jesus Christ” yet. She told me this to prove the whole Adam and Eve thing to me. She said that she didn’t know her life was sinful at the time because of her lack of knowledge. I kind of understood that she believed it wasn’t a sin? Also, she mentioned that because of Our Lord’s sacrifice on the cross she had no need to repent anymore.

 

[fhansen]

Well, it’d be good if she doesn’t believe in sola scriptura-but I don’t know what other authority or source she might be listening to. Anyway ask her this, when God commanded Adam not to eat of the forbidden fruit, did He want Adam to eat of it? The answer to that question means that either, 1) Adam had free will, or 2) Adam had no free will and God is a liar who is directly responsible for all evil as He willed it Himself.

 

[terrytango]

You can’t ever say something is “just Tradition” - if it is Sacred Tradition then it is just as infallible and true as Sacred Scripture - sorry to fuss there but it is so important to get that right. That’s why Dan_Defender says it is “not even” Tradition, because it would definitely be true if it was.

 

[Francis]

@Gabrielle

She told me that the devil had no free will and that he was an archangel. Now, I know this isn’t true so when she was done speaking, I was like “ Hmmm, well that’s interesting but you know, I believe he does have free will and that he was a Seraph”. Now, she told me that in the Bible it said he was an archangel, and I asked where. Obviously it doesn’t, but I also couldn’t find anything that said he was

No she is wrong, We believe that in the beginning, God created Satan as a good angel: The Lateran Council IV (1215) stated, “The devil and the other demons were indeed created naturally good by God, but they became evil by their own doing.” These angels irrevocably chose through their free will to rebel against God and not to serve Him. For this rebellion, they were cast into hell. Sacred Scripture attests to this belief: Our Lord, speaking of the final judgment, said, “Then [the Son of Man] will say to those on His left: ‘out of my sight, you condemned, into that everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels’” Mt 25:41). 2 Peter 2:4,5 St. Peter wrote, "Did God spare even the angels who sinned? He did not! He held them captive in Tartarus

THE APOSTOLIC TRADITION

75 Christ the Lord, in whom the entire Revelation of the most high God is summed up, commanded the apostles to preach the Gospel, which had been promised beforehand by the prophets, and which he fulfilled in his own person and promulgated with his own lips. In preaching the Gospel, they were to communicate the gifts of God to all men. This Gospel was to be the source of all saving truth and moral discipline."32

In the apostolic preaching. . .

76 In keeping with the Lord’s command, the Gospel was handed on in two ways:

• orally ;by the apostles who handed on, by the spoken word of their preaching, by the example they gave, by the institutions they established, what they themselves had received - whether from the lips of Christ, from his way of life and his works, or whether they had learned it at the prompting of the Holy Spirit";33
• in writing ;by those apostles and other men associated with the apostles who, under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit, committed the message of salvation to writing.34

. . . continued in apostolic succession

77 ;In order that the full and living Gospel might always be preserved in the Church the apostles left bishops as their successors. They gave them their own position of teaching authority. Indeed, "the apostolic preaching, which is expressed in a special way in the inspired books, was to be preserved in a continuous line of succession until the end of time.36

 

[Francis]

@Gabrielle

My next question comes from her argument that he had no free will. She said he was created to love and worship God ( which we both agreed on) , but according to her this means he has no will of his own since he was created with that purpose

if he has no free will he wouldn’t have rebelled in Revelation 12:7 And war broke out in heaven; Michael and his angels fought against the dragon. The dragon and his angels fought back, 8 but they were defeated, and there was no longer any place for them in heaven. 9 The great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world—he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.

10 Then I heard a loud voice in heaven, proclaiming,“Now have come the salvation and the power
and the kingdom of our God and the authority of his Messiah,for the accuser of our comrades has been thrown down,who accuses them day and night before our God.Isaiah 14 :9 Sheol beneath is stirred upto meet you when you come;it rouses the shades to greet you,all who were leaders of the earth;it raises from their thrones all who were kings of the nations.10 All of them will speak and say to you:“You too have become as weak as we!You have become like us!”11 Your pomp is brought down to Sheol,and the sound of your harps;maggots are the bed beneath you,and worms are your covering.12 How you are fallen from heaven,O Day Star, son of Dawn!How you are cut down to the ground,you who laid the nations low!13 You said in your heart,“I will ascend to heaven;I will raise my throne above the stars of God;I will sit on the mount of assembly on the heights of Zaphon;14 I will ascend to the tops of the clouds,I will make myself like the Most High.”

It is very logical to argue that only an archangel will fight against another archangel who can dare too

Jude 1:6 And the angels who did not keep their own position, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains in deepest darkness for the judgment of the great day. 9 But when the archangel Michael contended with the devil and disputed about the body of Moses, he did not dare to bring a condemnation of slander against him, but said, “The Lord rebuke you!” 10 But these people slander whatever they do not understand, and they are destroyed by those things that, like irrational animals, they know by instinct. 11 Woe to them! For they go the way of Cain, and abandon themselves to Balaam’s error for the sake of gain, and perish in Korah’s rebellion.

 

[Vico]

…,
she said that when Adam and Eve sinned their relationship with God was completely destroyed. I always thought it had just been badly wounded. We can’t be completely separated from God until we are in hell ( correct?
…
She said that she didn’t know her life was sinful at the time because of her lack of knowledge. I kind of understood that she believed it wasn’t a sin?
…
Also, she mentioned that because of Our Lord’s sacrifice on the cross she had no need to repent anymore.

Catechism of the Catholic Church

376 By the radiance of this grace all dimensions of man’s life were confirmed. As long as he remained in the divine intimacy, man would not have to suffer or die.252 The inner harmony of the human person, the harmony between man and woman,253 and finally the harmony between the first couple and all creation, comprised the state called “original justice”.

379 This entire harmony of original justice, foreseen for man in God’s plan, will be lost by the sin of our first parents.

384 Revelation makes known to us the state of original holiness and justice of man and woman before sin: from their friendship with God flowed the happiness of their existence in paradise.

1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

1857 For a sin to be mortal , three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."131

1735 Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance, inadvertence, duress, fear, habit, inordinate attachments, and other psychological or social factors.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

2352 … To form an equitable judgment about the subjects’ moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety or other psychological or social factors that lessen, if not even reduce to a minimum, moral culpability.

 

[MT1926]

She said she wanted to pick up the conversation where it left off, but I am completely at a loss.

Where you left off? Tell her we need to back up and pick one subject and go from there.

Don’t let her drive the cart all over the place. Pick one topic and discuss it. Then agree to meet again and pick back up where you left off on that one topic. If she isn’t willing to do this then she has absolutely no intention of having a discussion with you. Her only intention is to prove to you that her personal interpretation of scripture is right and you are wrong.

That is exactly what she said! She said that since the tree had the knowledge of good and evil it meant they didn’t so since they didn’t know they had no will!

She spoke to me about how she lived a life of sin when she was young, but that at the time she didn’t have free will because she didn’t have “ a personal relationship with Jesus Christ” yet.

Sounds to me like your friend doesn’t know what the definition of free will is. Maybe you could start here and ask her to define what she means when she talks about free will.

When she was a child she had free will to choose good or evil, sure it might not be a mortal sin since she didn’t know that it was a mortal sin, but just because she now has Jesus doesn’t mean she can keep committing that sin and it isn’t mortal.

Also, she mentioned that because of Our Lord’s sacrifice on the cross she had no need to repent anymore.

Yeah good luck with that.

It seems to me that your friend is coming off as an uninformed Calvinist or from a group that is picking and choosing what they like from the reformers. She is trying to relate to you what she is being taught but doesn’t really have a full grasp of the teaching yet. I’m thinking she is using you as practice.

Definitely get her to stick to one subject, even if you need to discuss that one subject for weeks.

God Bless

 

[Lee1]

Why didn’t Almighty God simply destroy the rebellious angels?
All of them.

 

[guanophore]

. For example, she said that when Adam and Eve sinned their relationship with God was completely destroyed. I always thought it had just been badly wounded.

You have a good ear Gabrielle! This is an excellent example of the heresies of Calvanism.

We can’t be completely separated from God until we are in hell ( correct? Please correct me if I’m wrong).

Indeed yes. I am not even sure that hell separates people from His love, as He loves every soul He creates. Even in Hell God’s love is present, but it experienced as painful to those who reject it.

She spoke to me about how she lived a life of sin when she was young, but that at the time she didn’t have free will because she didn’t have “ a personal relationship with Jesus Christ” yet.

Yes, this is another good example of Calvanism. You will note that there is nowhere in the bible that says we are to have a “personal relationship with Jesus Christ”. This is a rather modern invention. We are slaves to sin, until we are delivered from that slavery by Jesus’ Grace, shed abroad in our hearts. The Apostles taught that this occurred in baptism, but modern evangelicals believe it happens when they pray the sinners prayer.

Also, she mentioned that because of Our Lord’s sacrifice on the cross she had no need to repent anymore.

Yes, this is also an idea from Calvanism. He taught that Jesus paid for all of our sins on the cross, so we no longer have a “sin issue”. It is also taught in Calvanistic circles that Catholics are unduly pre-occupied with sin, which has already been dealt with and should not be a point of focus for Christians.

But when one reads the Scriptures, it is clear that all of them, especially the words of Jesus, talk at great length about sin.

 

[Francis]

She came back with the argument that we were created with the purpose of having dominion over the earth ( she gets this from Genesis she says) not necessarily to love God.

Jesus said we should love in God as in Matthew 22:37 He said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the greatest and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

She says that this has something to do with the fall.

Apparently, she believes that Adam and Eve didn’t have free will because God told them that they were not supposed to eat of the tree.

Word of God is very clear,as god commanded (it was like a commandment )man not to eat but,he chose to, when eve gave him to eat,with full consent Genesis 1:15 The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.”

To this she replied that we are no longer under the law but under grace, which means we don’t have follow the 10 commandments.

wrong Revelation 12:17 Then the dragon was angry with the woman, and went off to make war on the rest of her children, those who keep the commandments of God and hold the testimony of
Jesus.
2 John 1:6:6 And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment just as you have heard it from the beginning—you must walk in it.
1 Corinthians 7:19 19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing; **but obeying the commandments of God is everything.**Galatians 5:14 For the whole law is summed up in a single commandment, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

1 Timothy 6:14 to keep the commandment without spot or blame until the manifestation of our Lord Jesus Christ,

1 John 5:3 For the love of God is this, that we obey his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome,

John 14:15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments

James 2:1010 For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become accountable for all of it.