What if Satan reformed?

Many Christians believe in a literal Satan: a spirit being who functions as the enemy of God and tries to ensnare souls. This post is addressed to them.The purpose of this thread is not to challenge your belief. Rather, it is to explore a possibility I have never heard anyone discuss: What if Satan reformed?Traditionally he is said to be intelligent ('wily' and 'clever' are the usual adjectives). It is said that he sees his doom coming and, knowing this, he works around the clock to thwart God's purposes in the world.But surely, being as smart as he is, Satan has given some thought by now to the sheer pointlessness of this exercise. Why work so hard in a lost cause? At the very least, he could take a break. Smarter yet, he could throw in his lot with a merciful God. Why not repent, confess his crimes, and throw himself on God's mercy? He has free will, right? He could do it.Imagine that Satan has a change of heart and becomes the most holy, angelic, benevolent spirit there is. Instead of putting evil thoughts into people's heads, he starts putting holy thoughts into them. What now?If you believe in a literal Satan and in free will, this is not ultimately a hypothetical question. You have to admit it as a real possibililty. Satan could switch sides at any time. It could have happened a few hours ago.What would be the implications?Here are the questions that have me most curious to know what you think. Feel free to address any others.1. Would God forgive?Does God's mercy extend to Satan? If so, Satan is redeemable. If not... why not?2. Would evil disappear?Without Satan and his minions causing trouble, would the earth revert to a state of Edenic paradise? Would immorality cease? Would disease, catastrophe, and war disappear? Or would some of these things remain because they come to us from other sources (conquence of the Fall, human free will, desire of God to test us)? If so, which problems would cease and which would continue?3. How would you discern spirits if they all said the same thing?If you get a holy idea in your head, how would you know if it came to you from the Holy Spirit or from a newly benevolent Lucifer? How much would it matter to you?4. How would you get the memo?Christians have gone through centuries with Satan as a tempter and an adversary. If he suddenly put himself on the side of the angels, how would you get the news? What is the source for late-breaking spiritual information of this kind? Would books have to be added to the Bible to bring it up to date?Thanks. Over to you.

---

Archer

Hi, Phat! Thanks for the friendly welcome to EvC earlier.You asked:

If Satan were able to change, would he have any desire to do so?

As far as being able: any creature with free will would have the option, right?As far as having the desire... well, that's the question, really. What if he did?He would surely have plenty of incentive. You quoted from Revelation, a book he would know. It describes his present course of action (at least, his 'present' course of action at the time the book was written) as ending badly for him. And he's had two millennia to think it over.

---

Archer

Creavolution writes:

I'm really curious to see some more responses to this from some of the more .. how shall I put it... 'traditional' christians.

So am I.Anyone who regards Satan as a real being has to admit Satan's personal change as a real possibility. You'd expect they would have a lot of ideas about this.

---

Archer

Within the context of Gods dramatic "play" that you mention, I believe that some characters develop while others are insignificant.

I'm interested in hearing more about this, Phat, if you don't mind.You seem to be suggesting that 'significance' and the ability to 'develop' go hand in hand. Am I understanding that correctly?

---

Archer

phat writes: Why would freethinking 'default' toward evil?Freethinkers want to follow truth where it leads. Why wouldn't that path 'default' toward the holy?

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Wow. Fascinating. Thanks for calling this to my attention.Yazidis - WikipediaWhat if... Malak Ta'us as conceived by the Yazidis is the real thing? And all the other religions have it wrong?A lot of people are in for a big surprise, I'd say.That peacock mandala is exquisite. I've never seen that before.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

arachnophilia writes: Two romanizations of the same word. Context distinguishes the meaning.The name of the Yazidi angel is certainly romanized both ways, as you can see in the Wikipedia articles.The Wiki article on the angel himself spells the name as Melek and notes this:

Melek Taus is sometimes transliterated Malak Ta'us or Malik Taws. In Semitic languages, malik variably means 'king' or 'angel'.

​

Melek Tas - Wikipedia

The Wiki article on the Yazidi spells the angel's name as Malak and notes this:

In the Yazidi worldview, God created the world, which is now in the care of a Heptad of seven Holy Beings, often known as Angels or heft sirr (the Seven Mysteries). Pre-eminent among these is Malak Ta’us (Taws Melek in Kurdish), the Peacock Angel, who is equated with Satan or Devil by some Muslims and Christians. 'The reason for the Yazidis reputation of being devil worshipers, is connected to the other name of Malak Ta'us, Shaytan, the same name as the Koran's for Satan.' However, according to the Kurdish linguist Jamal Nebez, the word Taus is most probably derived from the Greek and is related to the words Zeus and Theos, alluding to the meaning of God. Accordingly, Malak Ta'us is God's Angel, and this is how Yezidis themselves see Malak Ta'us or Taus-e-Malak.

​

Yazidis - Wikipedia

For this post I went with the Kurds in my heading..Edited by Archer Opterix, : Clarity.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Thanks, RAZD. Very funny--and thought-provoking!

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

I appreciate your participation, viewfromthetop, but as your post consists of end times catastrophizing it strikes me as clearly off topic.The subject is Satan's possible reform. Please read the original post, which poses a series of questions on the implications of such a transition. Feel free to share your thoughts, but please mind the topic.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

This is almost a testable hypothesis. All we need is some angel DNA.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

So angels would be 96% chimpanzee, too.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

You're over my head, viewfromthetop. But you are right that we have gone off topic.Your view of Satan's chance to reform, if I understand it, is that he ceased to have one as soon as the book of Revelation was written. A certain outcome was predicted so that outcome is guaranteed. In effect Satan--even though he is smart and he knows what is in the book and he has centuries to think it over--lacks the free will to reform.Is that a fair statement of your view?

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

What's flippant about the possibility of repentance? I don't see how you get disrespect from this. None is intended or implied. Note what The Hope of the Gentiles himself has to say here:

The seventy returned with joy, saying, ”Lord, in your name even the demons submit to us!’ [Jesus] said to them, ”I watched Satan fall from heaven like a flash of lightning.'

​

Luke 10.17-18

If Satan literally existed in heaven once, he cannot be simply 'Evil incarnate' as you say. He has already shown that he is capable of change. It's change for the worse, to be sure, but change.The question may legitimately be raised then as to whether this being remains capable of change. If so, the possibility of redemption exists.If one views Satan as a real person--an individual being, with a consciousnesss and personality--then change would always have to be a possibility. Human beings had a 'fall' of their own, didn't they? And doesn't God help them up? So the question becomes one of God's grace. Does it have a limit? Why would it not extend to a contrite Satan? If not, why not?Of course, if you regard Satan as mainly a symbolic figure--a personification of evil, 'Evil incarnate' as you say--the question goes away. He is pure evil and remains so. Reverse a symbol and the original symbol ceases to exist.Viewing Satan as a symbol rather than a person means regarding him as a literary invention or, if we think of him as having actual existence, as more of a computer program than a person (as viewfrom thetop puts it). The story of his 'past' as a fallen angel would be made of essentially the same stuff. His 'fall' would either be construed as a literary invention or as the moment God unleashed his 'computer virus' onto creation.What is your view?.Edited by Archer Opterix, : Typo.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

I'm reading testimonials about individuals' beliefs about salvation.Let's take that to the topic: can a repentent Satan be saved?
Please see the questions in the OP.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Thanks, Philip, for taking the time to provide such a detailed and articulate response to the hypothetical question. You have definite views on this, cogently presented.How do you view the issue of free will? If I understand you, you say disobedience would cease to exist if Satan reformed.You are the first person who has said God would call an immediate halt to the universe if Satan converted. This is very interesting. It implies that Satan's existence has much to do with why God created the universe in the first place. It also suggests that the presence of evil sustains the universe somehow, since Satan's demise or conversion both have the effect of ending it. What is the goal of Creation, as you see it? On the contrary: I think it's finally getting somewhere. If you decide to change the channel, I respect your decision. But I hope you won't.It does seem that the prospect of a redeemed Satan is far more unsettling to people than the prospect of an evil one.Why do you think this is?_Edited by Archer Opterix, : Clarity.Edited by Archer Opterix, : Typo.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.