Nigel Tomes - LSM's Unorthodox Satanology

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

Who has the power to cause animals to speak? Who caused Balaam's donkey to speak? It was God.
Is there any example in the Bible of an angel (Satan) causing an animal to speak?

The lack of multiple occurrences of Satan causing animals to speak does not disprove the possibility of it happening. It just means that there's only one occurrence that is of any importance. In Job, Satan had the power to do various things and all he needed was God's permission. I don't think making an animal speak is out of the question.

[Evangelical]

Originally Posted by Freedom

The lack of multiple occurrences of Satan causing animals to speak does not disprove the possibility of it happening. It just means that there's only one occurrence that is of any importance. In Job, Satan had the power to do various things and all he needed was God's permission. I don't think making an animal speak is out of the question.

There is a lack of one occurrence of Satan causing an animal to speak.

In Job, Satan did not have the power himself, as evidenced by Satan asking God to strike Job (not saying he would do it himself):
Job 1:11 "But now stretch out your hand and strike everything he has, and he will surely curse you to your face.""

The power was given to him by God:
Job 1:12 "The LORD said to Satan, "Very well, then, everything he has is in your power, but on the man himself do not lay a finger." Then Satan went out from the presence of the LORD."

In the case of Balaam's donkey, it says that God caused the donkey to speak.
Numbers 22:28 "Then the LORD made the donkey speak"

In Genesis it does not say anyone (God or Satan) made the serpent speak.

If anyone made the serpent speak, it is more likely to be God considering that God made the donkey speak, and there is no record of satan making anything speak.

If Genesis played out as it did in Job, then it was God who gave the serpent power to speak to Eve to deceive her, or gave that power to Satan to do it.

In my mind, the idea of Satan using his own power to deceive Eve, outside of God's plan and will, is not supported by the Bible.

[Freedom]

Originally Posted by Evangelical

If Genesis played out as it did in Job, then it was God who gave the serpent power to speak to Eve to deceive her, or gave that power to Satan to do it.

In my mind, the idea of Satan using his own power to deceive Eve, outside of God's plan and will, is not supported by the Bible.

I don't deny that Gen 3 could have played out the same way as Job, but I find the implications of that view a bit concerning, had God played role in arranging thing. God allowed Job to 'prove' himself with Job eventually confessing God's power. In the Garden of Eden, the outcome was disobedience. Would God have purposely setup Eve to disobey Him?

The question that comes to my mind relating to Job is why Satan needed God’s permission to ‘test’ Job. I think the answer is in verse 10:
Have You not made a hedge around him, around his household, and around all that he has on every side? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his possessions have increased in the land.

This verse indicates Job was under God’s protection and blessing. That, of course, was superior to any power Satan did have, whatever power that may be. To me, this suggests that the permission needed was specific to the situation. In other words, I don’t see evidence that would suggest that Satan always needs permission to do evil things.

I think of it this way – in all the cases of those who had demons cast out by Jesus, would it be safe to say that God had previously ‘authorized’ the people to become possessed? I don’t think so. If that were the case, Jesus would have been wasting his time undoing what had been previously approved.

Getting back to the serpent, I don’t see any evidence that necessitates God’s explicit approval for Satan to have possess the serpent. I also don’t see any evidence that would have disallowed the serpent from speaking. So I don’t shy away from a literal reading of Gen 3. At the same time, I not necessarily dismissive of other views, I just don’t think there is good reason in this case to deviate from what the text says.

The thing about Gen 3 is that it is sparse on details, enough so that omission could be suggestive of metaphor. But if we go that route, other questions arise. What is the intended metaphor/allegory? How do we know to interpret it that way? Unless we can answer those questions confidently, I do not find it advisable to take certain allegories to heart.