Comments on: What Was Satan’s Plan?

By: Rcaywood

Rcaywood — Sat, 28 Mar 2015 17:07:32 +0000

This hasn’t been a new idea for me. Our seminary teachers in rural southeastern Idaho taught us this for years over 20 years ago. we had to choose between three schools, Force, Freedom and Fun. In Force, all students took the same classes and had ‘tutors’ who made sure they all got the work done. Everyone was equal and got the same grades because they all did the same work. Freedom U had a variety of majors, with students grades and graduation dependent upon the work they put in. Fun College was for those students who wanted to whatever they wished. Whether on not you showed up to class, did any work, everyone graduated with perfect grades. Then we talked about how the different schools were analogous to the pre-mortal councils. For a group of teenagers, this was heady discussion and new ideas that we hadn’t heard before. It was presented as “We know what God’s plan was, but the scriptures only say that ‘Satan sought to destroy the agency of man’ and we don’t have specifics, so here are two possible ways that Lucifer could destroy agency.”
Since then, when lessons on agency appear, I make sure to either make a comment or if I am teaching, to make sure that those options are discussed as equally valid, although i lean more to the removal of consequences as most likely.
For one EQ lesson, I used a variety of a magic trick. I had a number of cups on the table when the quorum entered the room, each cup with a different amount of money in it, from a penny to 100 dollar bill. Then I had one member of the class start to choose cups, with the knowledge that they could have the money left in the last cup after all the choices had been made. First they chose three cups. I then had them continue to choose a number of cups until there were only two, then choose one of the remaining. Now depending on which cups were chosen, I either removed the choices or removed the ones not selected, but the class member did not know which was going to happen. Whatever choices they made, they were going to end up with the nickel. That led to some great discussions aobut agency and what are the components necessary for agency to actually be present. We had four components instead of the five DB talked about, but very similar theme to that list – Different choices of action, no coercion for any action, separate consequences for each action and knowledge about the likely consequences of those choices.
Looking at it in economic terms, if Satan destroys our agency by removing consequences, then there is now opportunity cost associated with choices, because there is no next best choice on the list. You are not giving up anything in that world.
As MIrrorrorrim stated, most people only associate agency with the freedom/ability to choose, and not with anything else.

By: mirrorrorrim

mirrorrorrim — Fri, 27 Mar 2015 16:55:35 +0000

Um, Calling Michael 2050, I don’t think anyone earns exaltation. Otherwise we wouldn’t need the Atonement. That’s what grace is all about.

Julie, besides some prominent quotes by priesthood leaders, I think the main reason most people believe Satan wanted to force everyone to do right was verse 3 of Moses 4, where God tells Moses “Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man.” To the average reader, having his or her agency destroyed, but still obtaining salvation, invokes an image of being forced to do what’s right.

I think it’s interesting, though, that in verse 1, Satan is quoted as saying ” I will redeem all mankind.” I normally don’t like to quibble over individual words because of how complicated translation and revelation can be, but I do find it interesting that Satan uses the word “redeem,” which is about restoring something that was lost. If he was simply forcing everyone to do right, “preserve” or “maintain” seem like better words to use. So if Satan is taking away choice in his plan, I think it is more natural to assume he isn’t forcing everyone to do what’s right, but is having the Atonement apply to everyone without them having to choose to accept it. That might take many forms, including the one you suggest, where it simply doesn’t matter what people do, since Satan’s atonement will save them from their sins with no choice or action on their part.

It’s essentially taking grace to a drastic extreme.

I feel it’s also important that Satan wanted for God to give him His power—in Satan’s plan, instead of everyone being elevated to Godhood, it seems that he would be the sole possessor of it, with it being something that is apparently transferred, not shared. So it may be that Satan saw no reason for Godhood to be given to all of God’s followers. If that is so, it’s interesting to think about what else the point of Satan’s plan for mortality was.

By: callingmichael2050

callingmichael2050 — Wed, 25 Mar 2015 05:02:27 +0000

This plan vs that plan. Did it have to do with our agency or did it thwart the very essence of the need for a “Savior”. I don’t see a lot of merit in challenging the discourses of what Lucifer’s plan was or wasn’t. He was making a play of the very Throne of God.
Did you catch that. He wanted a short-cut and to be placed where Elohim was sitting. Lucifer wanted to circumvent the “plan” of Eternal Life — to go from one Exaltation to Exaltation. He wanted to replace Elohim. Instead of “earning” his reward — as had eons of Gods before him — he wanted to go from his current stature to the stature of Our Great God. For God had progressed from Eternity to Eternity, He had followed the “Plan” from the beginning. Lucifer wanted to take away from Elohim what He (Elohim) had rightfully earned and inherited. Lucifer wanted to supplant Heavenly Father and take what was not rightfully his to take. The “plan” was a tool to accomplish his selfish designs from the beginning.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Mon, 23 Mar 2015 21:39:32 +0000

It reduces moral agency with regards to the question itself merely because there now are no moral consequences. I think this is where moral agency and free will get conflated by many. As I read it the issue is choice between two choices with moral consequences and a kind of moral attraction for us. But I recognize not everyone sees it that way.

By: Adam G.

Adam G. — Mon, 23 Mar 2015 16:32:09 +0000

“I like to use the following examples with my students of me coming upon my brother eating a pecan:
1. In the first example, I ask him for a slice and tell him that I’ll give him $100 if he does or beat him with a stick if he doesn’t.
2. In the second example I ask him for a slice but tell him there are no consequences if he does or doesn’t.
In which example does my brother have more agency? Seems rather obvious to me that in the latter my brother is able to have more agency, is able to be more moral, and is better able to learn to love than in the former.”

It seems rather obvious to me that both examples reduce or even eliminate agency. Your second example, where magically there are no consequences at all, manages to eliminate agency even more comprehensively then the first.

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 23 Mar 2015 02:42:25 +0000

Charles Harrell’s book “This Is My Doctrine” has a very clear explanation on Satan’s plan and how it evolved in Mormon theology over time.

By: Josh Smith

Josh Smith — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 20:00:00 +0000

Eric Nelson (#57): Thanks for the links, though I don’t think they really went to my question. The heart of my question is whether Mormon theology falls apart with an apathetic Satan. You know, if instead of tempting he sat around eating generic Cheeto Puffs and watching “Law and Order” reruns. Maybe on Fridays he and his minions line dance. If someone had to rewrite the narrative with a lazy Satan, what would it look like?

rogerdhansen (#61):

“Can one still be Mormon and not believe in Satan?”

Probably. But brace yourself. Awhile back in Sunday School we were discussing Jesus’ healing of the demon possessed boy. I raised my hand and said something benign about Jesus and loving those with mental illness. Woo doggy. Hands shot up all over the place with all manner of thoughts about demons possessing bodies and Satan’s lust for flesh. I sheepishly looked at my wife. “What just happened?”

Another thought … what are you going to do when you sing the war-with-Satan-and-his-minions songs? There is a metaphor deep within our Mormon psyche: the faith as battle metaphor. I bet this next week you’ll sing a hymn in sacrament meeting linking faith to violence against Satan and his minions. It’s everywhere once you start looking for it. If you don’t believe in Satan, …

By: rogerdhansen

rogerdhansen — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 19:34:58 +0000

Can one still be Mormon and not believe in Satan? (To believe that Satan is simply the absence of good or God.) Can one still be Mormon and believe the “War in Heaven” is an allegory or a fable? Does the reality of Satan or the “War in Heaven” really matter? I don’t think either affect my life one bit.

By: Lew Scannon

Lew Scannon — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:16:29 +0000

Who is this Satan everybody is talking about?

JK. Here’s something to think about. I’ve pulled together an estimate of earth’s population based on Mormon assumptions and some statistics from two reputable research institutes. My VERY conservative estimate puts earth’s total population between being booted out of the Garden and the end of the Millennium at over 200 billion. If we use the common Mormon assumption that 1/3 of the hosts of heaven were cast down to earth to tempt the rest of us, that is over 100 billion tempters. That means each of us today has over 10 of Satan’s lackeys whispering to us. Maybe they take shifts, each tempting for a couple of hours, then running off to do their laundry or go grocery shopping or whatever evil spirits do in their spare time.

Sometimes Mormon theology doesn’t make much sense when looked at mathematically.

And imagine Satan trying to organize and motivate his massive evil army. Remember, these are spirits who were cast out because they were disobedient. You really think they are going to obey Satan and follow him like a bunch of robots? If there is such a group of evil spirits, my guess is that they live in self-imposed chaos. These are not armies of highly disciplined Nazi goose-steppers.

By: Julie M. Smith

Julie M. Smith — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 13:13:49 +0000

“what Julie takes to be a new idea” — I don’t consider Pres. Clark “new”!

By: Pacumeni

Pacumeni — Thu, 19 Mar 2015 02:53:28 +0000

Here is a link to an article in Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture that discusses this issue in some depth. The section entitled “The Original Lie” focuses on issues Julie raises. The article cites a book by Greg Wright and an Article by Terryl Givens and a number of Book of Mormon figures: Nephi, Nehor, Samuel the Lamanite. It also notes that what Julie takes to be a new idea was prominently discussed by W.W. Phelps in the Nauvoo days.

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/restoration-a-theological-poem-in-the-book-of-mormon/

By: Eric Nielson

Eric Nielson — Wed, 18 Mar 2015 23:24:03 +0000

Stupid html code.

https://smallsimple.wordpress.com/2005/12/11/just-what-was-satans-plan-anyway/

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FSatans-Free-Agency-Greg-Wright%2Fdp%2F193098006X&ei=iAgKVaLcJsyegwT7-oOQBA&usg=AFQjCNF0AoM1QBE6J-xmqFuiPxrImwuvRg&bvm=bv.88528373,d.eXY

sorry.

By: Eric Nielson

Eric Nielson — Wed, 18 Mar 2015 23:22:29 +0000

Trying one more time with the links: Post: here. Book: here.

By: Clark Goble

Clark Goble — Wed, 18 Mar 2015 23:03:10 +0000

The way most people portray Satan’s plan is as some sort of Orwellian totalitarian government. Yet it would seem if he just wants people to choose good he could just design a biological system that only desires the good. People speaking on this subject often assume free will is absolute or something. Yet our biological system severely limits what we think about, our inclination and impulses and a lot more. It would be fairly easy were Satan in charge for him to design a biological system that does what he wanted. Limiting available external choices isn’t even necessary.

So the debate about what the war in heaven was about (and it’s really not clear what it really was about other than Satan not wanting to follow God’s plan) seems to make a lot of assumptions that just aren’t warranted.

The question of Satan’s plan is also wrapped up with questions of God’s plan. It’s fine to say that we came here to be tested and to develop in a way we couldn’t in God’s presence. Yet why does it take this particular form? Why do we, in the west, live in nations where it’s so easy to be ethical? Why did people in the 19th century live in a civilization where slavery was by and large seen as OK? Why is our biology the way it is with apparently quite a lot of randomness in its development? (I often joke that Satan’s plan was simply to ensure a designed body rather than an evolved one) Effectively the question of God’s plan and Satan’s plan is, for Mormons, really the question of what do we experience these particular kinds of evil?

By: rameumptom

rameumptom — Wed, 18 Mar 2015 22:41:40 +0000

It is also possible that Satan would just limit the choices. Rather than Baskin Robbins 31 Flavors, we only can choose between chocolate and vanilla. There is still a choice, but given limitations where we do not know there are other options, allows Satan to control us even as parents limit little children: “You can have this cereal or that one.”