Why did God create the Universe?

Perhaps http://www.ccel.org/ccel/edwards/works1.iv.html will help you out with your question.

 

Actually, if you have creation occurring after the fall of Satan, you missed it. God made a perfect, "very good" world into which sin was introduced and judgment with it.
I think I'll step aside for the day. Hopefully you can access the article, or search elsewhere. Jonathan Edwards "The End For Which God Created The World."

 

Why did God create the Universe?

Maybe he wanted an apple pie....

 

Or you could take Scripture at face value and accept that it was objectively good.

Satan serves God's purposes and he is NOT described as good.

God is objectively good. God is fundamentally the ultimate good. When He creates He necessarily creates good things.
""The LORD is upright; he is my Rock, and there is no wickedness in him." Psalm 92:15

I feel like you're making up theology to fit your worldview.

 

You asked the question...

...which prompted my own...

...to which you respond...

So I am guessing that you feel God created the heavens and the earth as a prison for Satan and his demons. Do I have that correct?

Secondly, embracing the Gap Restoration Theory is for some reasonable, but, I do not see it so. First, as in the Scripture you yourself presented, the demons that are eternally incarcerated are in tartaroō, not on earth.

Secondly, embracing the Gap Restoration Theory based on two verses, and ignoring the numerous statements in the very first chapter of Scripture doesn't make a lot of sense.

Third, Satan was not bound when he was cast out of Heaven, and is to this day walking about, to and fro upon the earth, as a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.

Fourth, the Gap Restoration Theory was, in my opinion, a response to the Theory of Evolution by those who did not have enough faith in GOd and His Word to take God at His Word, and know that those who present the earth as being, then millions of years old, and now they have changed it to billions of years old, because their theories are in error and continually cause them to change the "facts" so they can make their doctrine plausible.

So finally, when Scripture states "In the beginning," it is actually speaking of the beginning, not a reformation of an already existing creation.

Not really, no. We have in the first quote the fact that the earth was without form, which would soon be corrected in the following days of creation, and it was empty, which was also corrected in the following days of creation.

In the second quote, we have the destruction of, not the earth from a former creation, but the Land of God's People:


Jeremiah 4:23-27
King James Version (KJV)

23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.

25 I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.

26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger.

27 For thus hath the Lord said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.


A couple things to consider:

1. the mountains and hills were already in existence;
2. the mountains and hills do not disappear, which is necessary to meet the requirement of the formless and empty earth in Creation, but they tremble, and moved lightly;
3. Man is already in existence in this context, which means we nullify that man was created on the sixth day, which means...we nullify the Word of God;
4. the context shows the fruitful place and cities as broken down and a wilderness, again, not corresponding to the condition of the heavens and the earth when God Created them;
5. God states He will make the whole land desolate, but not in entirety, which is what would have had to happen if we were to try to see this as preceding the Six Days of Creation in Genesis One.

The context deals with those of Jeremiah's Day, not to what took place prior to the Creation account in Genesis.

If the earth were the "prison" in view here, then they would still be on the earth, lol. The terminology used by both Jude and Peter makes it certain that these demons have never been set free from the prison in which they were incarcerated.

Secondly, this is likely referring to demons after Satan's fall, because they did not "leave" the habitation of Heaven, they were thrown out.

It seems to me that Satan fell, and took some other Angels with him. They were cast out of Heaven, but not incarcerated, because we still see demons at work in Christ's Day. So being incarcerated would likely have taken place after the Fall, though it is equally possible those Peter and Jude refer to fell prior to Creation. It doesn't really have any bearing on Satan and his demons, though, because we know they are yet free, roaming the earth.

Some view Revelation 12:4 as referring to demons who are spoken of as "stars." They see Satan causing the fall of one third of Angels. The context deals with Satan's persecution of Christ, his desire to kill the Messiah when He is born.


God bless.

 

Only if you pull it out its context.


God bless.

 

))))

Not really. Sin is a noun, but not in the sense of it being a distinct entity, like for example the devil. The devil, the deceiver, the enemy and his demons are all actual beings. Sin, in this sense, is what we call the separation that exists when we sin (verb), the separation from God. Sin--separation from God--exists when we sin--we act outside of God's will--and as such, it couldn't have existed before Creation because there was no one to sin.

We know, for example that the potential to sin is not, in itself, a sin. God has granted His creatures free agency that allows them the creativity and volition to do His will (Genesis 2:9). However, for HIS purposes and according to the counsel of His own will, He also has allowed some--not all--of His creatures to sin.

Your argument is that God created a the earth as a prison, and that is just NOT Scriptural. You say that man has twisted Scripture to fit man's needs, but if your translation is twisted, get a new one: KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, and read it, study it. What you are asserting runs counter to the Creation Narrative in every reliable version of the Bible.

You are asserting that God's creation was not good. That God created a flawed construct.

"Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You[fn] shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?”
Genesis 3:1

Your statement has more in line with the above statement by the deceiver than what is revealed in Scripture.

 

During the time of Judgment:


Jeremiah 4:4-7
King James Version (KJV)

4 Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings.

5 Declare ye in Judah, and publish in Jerusalem; and say, Blow ye the trumpet in the land: cry, gather together, and say, Assemble yourselves, and let us go into the defenced cities.

6 Set up the standard toward Zion: retire, stay not: for I will bring evil from the north, and a great destruction.

7 The lion is come up from his thicket, and the destroyer of the Gentiles is on his way; he is gone forth from his place to make thy land desolate; and thy cities shall be laid waste, without an inhabitant.


This is simply another way to describe the Land as empty and without form.

I have already given you the context of this Chapter, what you do with it is up to you.

If you really want to ignore the context your proof-text is found in, and say the context changes for an entirely different meaning, which, as I pointed out, does not even agree with the Genesis Account of Creation, that is up to you.

Not sure who you mean by "we," and understanding Scripture as it is given is not, lol...humanistic. Its called exegesis, bringing out of the text what is there, rather than eisegesis, which is putting into the text what is not.

And there is no reasonable basis for the Gap Theory Restoration, and no reasonable basis to view the heavens and the earth as being a prison for demons that God renovated for man.

Correct.

You have. It is human reasoning that you are engaging in, rather than a proper approach to interpreting Scripture.

Here is another passage speaking of a land made empty and void due to the judgment of God:


Nahum 2:8-10
King James Version (KJV)

8 But Nineveh is of old like a pool of water: yet they shall flee away. Stand, stand, shall they cry; but none shall look back.

9 Take ye the spoil of silver, take the spoil of gold: for there is none end of the store and glory out of all the pleasant furniture.

10 She is empty, and void, and waste: and the heart melteth, and the knees smite together, and much pain is in all loins, and the faces of them all gather blackness.



God bless.

 

It is actually Judah and Jerusalem mentioned specifically by name in Jeremiah 4.

Nineveh is given to show another passage speaking of being void and without form and it speaking of an existing city and land, in response to your question...

It is figurative language speaking of desolation as a result of God's Judgment.


God bless.

 

Do you have a Biblical Basis for the question? How is darkness relevant to Satan's fall? We know he was thrust out of Heaven, and that now he roams the earth. So how can this be relevant to the discussion?


God bless.