Sin in Heaven?

March 17, 2012 1 comment

Milton gives an interesting (and disgusting) description of events when Satan meets up with his child, Sin, at the Gates of Hell. Apparently not knowing about Sin before this time, Sin explains to her father how Satan conceived her through his jealous thoughts.

This must have happened while Satan was still in Heaven. The way Milton tells it, it seems like Sin must have been born in Heaven, but laid dormant until Satan decided to actually start dwelling on it. It was only after dwelling on these thoughts (Sin), that Sin herself conceived and brought forth her child Death. These is nearly verbatim what James says about our own process in 1:15.

Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

This seems a little different than what Milton is saying however. In Paradise Lost, Sin is born before Satan can even dwell on the thought. But for James, this wouldn’t be considered Sin at this point, it would merely be Desire (or even Temptation). Sin doesn’t come automatically, she herself is born from desire. But Desire or Temptation themselves aren’t actually Sin.

At any rate, the end is the same. After our affair with Sin, the resulting offspring is Death. In Milton’s case, this is a spiritual death, or estrangement, but is nonetheless tied to physical death in the end. Physical Death and Spiritual Death are both symptoms of the same underlying problem.

Read more…


Hipster Mammon Was An Existentialist Before It Was Cool

December 22, 2011 Leave a comment

The plea of the arch-demon Mammon after the fall is eerily similar to the cry of the existentialist today. I have a great many friends who would gladly give a hearty ‘amen’ to the following excerpt from Mammon’s speech, not knowing its hellish origin:

…Let us not then pursue
By force impossible, by leave obtained
Unacceptable, though in Heaven, our state
Of splendid vassalage; but rather seek
Our own good from ourselves, and from our own
Live to ourselves, though in this vast recess,
Free, and to none accountable, preferring
Hard liberty before the easy yoke
Of servile pomp. Our greatness will appear
Then most conspicuous, when great things of small,
Useful of hurtful, prosperous of adverse
We can create, and in what place soe’re
Thrive under evil, and work ease out of pain
Through labour and endurance.

Milton hits this sentiment right on the head. 200 years after Paradise Lost, many people have come to say the same things Mammon has. They try to convince themselves that without Heaven, life in the here and now becomes all the more important. Even though everything is ultimately meaningless, we need to fool ourselves into believing that it really does have meaning or we’ll go crazy.

So we manufacture purpose on the fly. Then we tell ourselves that sticking to this meaningless meaning and purposeless purpose is somehow admirable. But the fact that Mammon’s cries anticipated the existentialist’s tells us that this isn’t really a logical necessity or philosophical foundation, it’s simply a quaint rationalization. Hearing this speech from the helpless and hopeless demon is only a cruel reminder to us that our justifications are nothing more than ad-hoc wish fulfillment.

The passage immediately before this is also telling, as Mammon screams out:

…How wearisome
Eternity so spent in worship paid
To whom we hate!

“It’s better to be in hell!” he tells himself. “How miserable it would be serve God!” I was recently listening to a talk by philosopher Daniel Dennett where he said the exact same thing. And his reasoning was the same as Mammon’s – We can only be truly free once we get rid of God.

Mammon of course knows the outcome of all this. He isn’t an atheist after all. He realizes the consequences of rebellion. But that doesn’t stop the rationalizations. No matter what your circumstances, you tell yourself whatever you need to in order to get to sleep at night.

What Purpose Satan?

December 7, 2011 2 comments

The defeat of Satan in heaven should have rendered him obsolete. As odd as rebellion in Heaven seems, it’s even more strange that God should allow such a being as Satan to continue to exist at all. And not only to continue to exist, but to continue to exist in such a way that he is able to still interfere with God’s plans. What possible reason could God have for allowing this? Why not just eliminate Satan?

In Book I, after Satan has his initial discourse with Beelzebub (two separate persons in Paradise Lost), Milton reveals three reasons why God permits Satan to have freedom to rebel:

  1. Satan’s continued rebellion only serves to bring just damnation on himself. By allowing Satan freedom, it’s almost as if God makes Satan his own prison guard.
  2. It allows Satan to see all his evil intentions and actions merely end up being used by God for good in the end.
  3. It confuses Satan and shows both him and everyone else that he is ultimately powerless.

Here we see right off the bat the futility of rebellion against omnipotence. It’s not that God is powerless to stop it, it’s that the very act of rebellion is part of the plan.

But here’s the intriguing aspect to what Milton has written. It’s not enough that God is actually just and righteous. It seems more important to Milton that God is seen to be just and righteous – seen to be just not only by us, but by Satan as well. If Satan were annihilated, or made to be causally impotent, that would certainly demonstrate God’s power and his justice, but Satan himself would not be able to acknowledge the fact. Beelzebub begrudgingly admits this to himself after he realizes his defeat, when he speaks of God and says “whom I now of force believe almighty”.

Is this need to be ‘seen to be just’ a weakness on God’s part? Or does perfect justice demand it? I’m not certain. If Satan were to have been utterly destroyed after his rebellion, certainly Satan would have lost, but perhaps not. Perhaps in some way, Satan would have won.

A continued existence in which Satan is free to continue to rebel doesn’t seem cruel and unusual either, but rather compassionate. It’s not as if an existence in hell necessarily precludes the possibility of forgiveness, but rather – the state of being in hell is one in which you don’t want to be forgiven.

Milton’s Satan: Admirable or Pathetic?

October 8, 2011 1 comment

There is a centuries-long debate concerning the chief character of Milton’s Paradise Lost, stemming from this fundamental question: How are we supposed to feel about Satan?

It may seem like an odd question to some, but to anyone who has read Paradise Lost, the question is difficult to answer. If Satan truly is who we think he is, why is the character so compelling to us? Did Milton have some sort of underlying motive? Is Satan perhaps the unfair victim of an overbearing cosmic killjoy with delusions of grandeur? Or is Milton’s depiction of Satan perhaps somehow ‘accidentally’ majestic?

William Blake, himself a huge admirer of Milton and his work, seems to be the first to suggest this ‘alternate view’ of Satan. A little over a hundred years after Paradise Lost, Blake wrote in his own work ‘The Marriage of Heaven and Hell’:

“The reason Milton wrote in fetters when he wrote of Angels and God, and at liberty when of Devils and Hell, is because he was a true Poet and of the Devil’s party without knowing it.”

This seems to insinuate that even if Milton wasn’t aware what he was doing, he was still under the compulsion to write positively of Satan. Since that time, Blake has had a large and influential following. After Blake, no less a poet than Percy Bysshe Shelley took up his mantle as Satan’s defender. In the years since, many others have followed in their footsteps right up until today. An upcoming film of Paradise Lost appears to be in the works which, given the sentiment of the culture today will undoubtedly join this group in portraying Satan as being the unjust victim of an oppressive deity. I suppose we’ll have to wait and see about this, but I’m pretty confident in my guess.

Read more…

Valiant-For-Truth’s Parents

April 20, 2011 2 comments

In the Second Part of Pilgrim’s Progress, Valiant-For-Truth’s parents dissuade him from going on a pilgrimage – read: They don’t want him to be a Christian. Here are the reasons they give:

  1. The way is too hard.
  2. He will be tricked and taken in by people.
  3. He will just end up coming back anyway.
  4. Mr. Hypocrisy will be waiting for him.

It seems like Mr. Hypocrisy has been hanging around the church for quite some time now. The others are interesting objections against being a Christian, but all of them except Mr. Hypocrisy don’t really reflect the concerns of people today.

Rather than concerns 1 – 3, I think parents today would mainly be worried not only about Mr. Hypocrisy, but also Mr. Intolerance, Mr. Bigotry, Mr. Hate-Speak, Mr. Doctrinaire, Mr. Close-Mind, and Mr. Fundamentalist. And they would not only be afraid about simply meeting these particular gentlemen, but that being a Christian means actually becoming one of them.

I suppose these fears are sadly justifiable, however it seems to me that it is more dependent on how the individual child is raised, rather than what religious belief they hold to. If you raise doctrinaire kids, they’ll grow up to be doctrinaire Christians. If you raise close-minded kids, they’ll grow up to be close-minded Christians. The question isn’t whether Christianity makes you that way, the question is: Why do Christian parents raise these types of children?

Valley of Humiliation pt. 2

April 18, 2011 Leave a comment

In the Pilgrim’s Progress, Christian meets up with Apollyon in the Valley of Humiliation, where he is humiliated (surprise, surprise) by having his failures exposed to him (read the blog post here). In the Second Part, Bunyan explains to us just exactly how this works.

It turns out that the only reason Christian had a hard time through the Valley was because of his pride. If someone is humble, then the Valley is not an awful trial for them, but rather a bountiful meadow. But what exactly makes this any different? It’s the same Valley, after all.

Bunyan explains to us that everyone slips up in the Valley. It is simply too steep a climb not to fall every once in a while. If you are prideful when entering the Valley, the inevitable slip-ups will be the source of great embarrassment to you, and Satan will take that opportunity to pounce on you.

But by itself, slipping-up isn’t what matters. Like I said: Everybody falters. The difference is that it’s only those who are humiliated about it that suffer through it. The humble go through the Valley rejoicing. They also slip, but they know that they must slip, and they thank God for helping them through.

This is an extremely difficult message for me to hear. I hate screwing up, and what’s worse, I hate it when others see me screw up. I can tell you from experience that I have a really hard time walking through this Valley. And unfortunately for me, it’s a Valley I often find myself in the middle of.

Bunyan’s Theodicy

April 16, 2011 Leave a comment

Very simply, a ‘theodicy’ is an explanation of why there is evil in the world if there is an all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful God in charge of things. The two facts don’t seem to fit together, and it’s something that monotheistic religions have often felt the need to offer justifications for (and rightly so).

Though some moderns toss their hands in the air exclaiming it to be a hopeless contradiction, this is a bit of an overstatement. The problem basically boils down to explanation. What possible explanation could God have for allowing such evil and hardship in this world? To simply say there can be no possible explanation is pretty well recognized as being illogical, but that alone doesn’t get us off the hook. Theologians have been offering possible answers since there have been theologians around to think about it.

In the Second Part of Pilgrim’s Progress, Bunyan adds a short theodicy of his own, almost as a side note.

Read more…