Saturday, March 04, 2006

satan's shackles


One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came with them. The LORD said to Satan, "Where have you come from?" Satan answered the LORD, "From roaming through the earth and going back and forth in it." Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man who fears God and shuns evil." "Does Job fear God for nothing?" Satan replied. "Have you not put a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread throughout the land. But stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face." The LORD said to Satan, "Very well, then, everything he has is in your hands, but on the man himself do not lay a finger." Then Satan went out from the presence of the LORD.  (Job 1:6- 12)

In an age where postmodernists (modern skeptics) and moral relativists are more plentiful than jackrabbits in spring, it is necessary to recall this story from the book of Job. This world has a Prince, a Prince who is the Father of Lies. Oh, how cleverly the serpent weaves his webs of deceit and iniquity! How subtly he phrases his ever-changing lines. "Did God really say?" he asks, and changes that which is into that which is not by a mere hiss and a linguistic magic show. 
 
What must always be remembered is that Satan has no authority save that which has been given to him for a time. We live in a world that is perceived through doubt and unprovability. Since coming to know good and evil, but still being unable to do control the world-plan, humans in-the-image of God who think they're gods have struggled to see the natural fall reconciled with the intellectual fall by trying to use scientific methodology to get to the heavens. As Karl Popper would say, all any scientific theory needs to be disproved is one more piece of data. It can be falsified but not verified. One can never have absolute proof if he or she is caught up in the world. In the same way, one is never able to reconcile one's bloated logical, moral knowledge to ever-changing empirical reality if he or she tries to begin with himself or herself.  

Yes, Satan is the Prince of this world. But we always have proof that he is shackled to the Good and to the Eternal. Evil, as a privation, can always only point to the Good. If everything was 'evil,' then we would have no knowledge of it, for there would be no good to compare it to. Of course, then it wouldn't be evil since evil requires an idea of good to be contrasted with. If everything (from our perspective) was good, then we would have no knowledge of evil. Instead, because there is evil, there must be a Good to be its standard, and we must always know this Good in order to know that the evil is not it. 

Truly, evil runs rampant in this world ruled by the Prince. But even the Prince is ruled by God and will face judgment one day. In the same way, any philosophy that asserts no right or wrong asserts that the only right is that there is no right or wrong and the only wrong is claiming that there is, and so they are already always wrong by their own standard. Also, any philosophy based on the intent to deconstruct, tear down, or disprove, is always subject to the charge of constancy of change. If they wish to maintain that there will always be something that comes up to disprove a stated truth then this itself is a stated constant truth that will be disproved. On the other hand, if they state that only some things will be disproved then they have relinquished their pessimistic insistence on the lack of absolute grounding.  

Thus, in both morality and logic, Satan is already always shackled to God, no matter how much we might wrestle with evil in the world or with our inability to settle on some clearly and distinctly provable idea.

Wednesday, March 01, 2006

proof

Something to think about:
"You think you've figured something out? You run over here all pleased with yourself because you changed your mind? Now you're certain? Hal, you don't know anything The book, the math, the dates, the writing, all that stuff you just decided with your buddies, it's just evidence. It doesn't prove anything." "OK, what would?" "Nothing. You should've trusted me." -from the movie Proof (2005)

speaking from silence

Secrecy and silence is often the best to express oneself. Kierkegaard wrote Fear and Trembling under the psudeonym Johanne de Silentio. He wrote as a poet, as one who claimed to have no faith, writingabout faith. He used the old Socratic technique of claiming ignorance. Ignorance is always safe to claim. Usually it's the one thing we're right about.

It often seems as though speaking from the silence of the grave is often the only expression one gets. Think of the Count of Monte Cristo, who was only free to live his life and get his bitter-sweet revenge after he was considered dead. Think also of Huck Finn, who killed a pig and spread its blood on the floor, making it look as though robbers had killed him in order to begin a new life away from his psycho father. I would prefer to speak while alive. I would prefer to live my life while alive, and not wait until after death to live. I have much better things to be doing when I'm dead.