There is no complementary relationship between Satan and God. The word complementary is the concept that at least two people, or objects, by their mutual combination benefit the whole more than the part comprising the whole.
Satan represents all that is evil, corrupt and despicable. Satan is the antithesis (opposite) of God. Therefore, there is nothing complementary about Satan and God’s relationship. Only those ignorant of the biblical God make such statements of error. Opposites cannot be complementary.
Complementary suggests similarity and compatibility. God and Satan are neither similar nor compatible. Therefore, the complimentary argument of Satan and God as complementary is completely illogical and irrational. The individual who buys into this lie is seduced by people wanting to reduce God to something less than what he is.
God does not need anything or anyone to enhance his position or being as an eternal, omnipotent Creator. Because God is sovereign over all his creation, which Satan is a part, the devil serves the purpose of God in the area of those who have rejected self-evident truth. We also know that even in the absence of demonic influence, men are nonetheless innately corrupt creatures and will damn themselves even in the absence of Satan’s influence.
In conclusion, to those making an argument for a duality between Christ and Satan there can be none. It is a dead-end. This is unfortunately one of those remarks that is made by people lacking a critical examination of the evidence. Oftentimes things like this get started as a Jesuit talking point and people become a Jesuit asset without even knowing it. People regurgitate what someone else says without subjecting that assertion to a more rational dissection. Sadly, this happens too often in the area of a spiritual of theological exchange. It occurs where the person asserting such a proposition is not firmly grounded in the truth of God’s word.
Election and ‘Free-will:’ Never the Twain Shall Meet
Election, like many other important Bible doctrines, is actually simple and straightforward. The eternal, elective counsel of the Godhead negates the idea that man is a free moral agent and can exercise, at any time, his ‘free-will.’ Man’s volitional autonomy (independence) from anyone or any influence beyond himself is just another lie peddled by the leftist (atheist). In the area of personal responsibility before one’s Creator, man must simply acknowledge the truth. Man does not get to decide what, or (who), constitutes the truth. Unlike many biblical concepts which are intended to stimulate serious, contemplative reflection, the doctrines and precepts revealed in the Bible are complete opposites, namely they do not, in any way, combine and benefit the whole or the part. Complete opposites implies the nullification of any complementary-combining relationship.
Consider these opposites: heaven vs. hell; light vs. darkness; sweet vs. bitter; holy vs. corrupt; transformation vs. reformation; lost vs. found; peace vs. conflict; rest vs. unrest; good vs. wicked; impartial vs. partial; justification vs. condemnation; forgiven vs. unforgiven; imputation vs. indebtedness; crucifixion of self vs. pride; humility vs. haughtiness; boasting vs. assurance; faith in Christ vs. faith in self; God’s wisdom vs. man’s foolishness; the visible vs. the invisible; the eternal vs. the temporal; the supernatural vs. the natural; the Spirit vs. the flesh; contentment and continuity vs. discontentment and hypocrisy; purposeful vs. aimlessness; the truth vs. a lie; the spirit of truth vs. the spirit of error, inspiration (Christ within) vs. complacency (man’s incompetency); pardoned vs. guilty; acknowledgement vs. ‘free-will’; wisdom, understanding, knowledge vs. foolishness, misunderstanding, simplicity (stupidity, idiocy, moronic, lacking ‘common sense,’ characterized by an unteachable spirit); reality vs. fantasy; objective vs. subjective; individualism vs. collectivism; independence vs. dependence; freedom vs. slavery; conviction vs. seduction; assurance vs. indecisiveness; worship of the Creator vs. worship of the creation; empirical science vs. consensus ‘science;’ genuine vs. counterfeit; discernment of truth vs. acceptance of a lie; rock vs. sand; love of God vs. love of self; responsibility vs. psychology (the blame game, e.g. shifting guilt from self to others); Christianity vs. religion; repent (self-renunciation) vs. reformation (self-realization); confession (honest assessment) vs. hypocrisy (victim mentality); Christ-centered vs. me-centered, and a host of other opposites too numerous to mention.
Determinism and Sin
Men love to play God. We see it everywhere. In our currency with its countless Masonic symbols, to a belief that should man be able to return to the past, he could alter his future. Nothing is farther from the truth. Man is subject to his Creator, Jesus Christ, whether he likes it or not—A man’s heart deviseth his way, but the LORD directeth his steps, as it says in Proverbs 16:9. This applies to the future, as well as the past. In Colossians 1:16 we are also told that by Christ all things consist, or hold together.
David Deutsch, a British theoretical (read speculative) physicist, atheist, and ‘expert’ in the field of sub-atomic behavior, has popularized the concept of parallel universes or the many worlds interpretation of ‘reality.’ A concept initiated by Nobel prize winner Austrian ‘scientist’ Erwin Schrödinger (1887-1961), the physicist attempted to resolve the numerous problems one would encounter if one could travel in time. Deutsch, in his attempts to evade the predictability as well as the scientifically inexplicable phenomenon existing within the universe, Deutsch’s godless wisdom built upon that of his predecessors. That collective, abstractive wisdom reveals an arrogance and conceit that is not only narcissistic but unintelligible. Their ‘science speak’ borders on insanity itself. Starting with nothing concrete, which runs counter to the laws of science itself, Deutsch and his predecessors engage routinely in collective-progressive speculation, theory and abstraction that no one but a lunatic would consider ‘intelligible.’
The Bible is clear in Genesis 3. Death came as a result of man’s sin toward his Creator, Jesus Christ. Death, both in the realm of the physical and spiritual, with its decay-decline-disintegration known as entropy, profoundly alters man’s understanding of time. Here are some points worth considering that are backed up by scripture and are inexplicable from a scientific perspective:
•God is eternal, however; time is sequential and viewed by man as comprising past, present, and future
•God is light, therefore as an eternal being he is not confined or constrained by his creation—God is separate and distinct from it. The whole discussion of animism and Gaia worship is a failure by men to understand God as distinct from his creation. This falls into the sacrilege of worshipping the creature rather than the Creator
•Determinism is the opposite of free-will. This is why men like David Deutsch, Erwin Schrödinger and other godless conjectural physicists resist the obvious—they want to play God. Yes, God has scripted man’s destiny, man’s responsibility however; lay in acknowledging what is obvious, axiomatic, and self-evident. As it says in Romans 1:20, man is without excuse. Men would rather hold the truth in unrighteousness
•Free-will has not only been responsible for the plethora of religious movements that are evident today, but free-will has also been responsible for all the inhumanities that have been inflicted upon man by other men. This has been given impetus by Darwin’s evolutionary teaching and Herbert Spencer’s concept of survival-of-the-fittest, both of which leave out any possibility of acknowledging what is self-evident from nature, all of which Jesus created
•Free-will has sent more people to hell than any other teaching AND is the prevalent mindset coming from the Protestant churches today. Protestantism has truly been Romanized and Darwinized
•The “killing your grandfather” paradox from men attempting to distinguish the past from the future simply confirms the linearity that time, in addition to its scriptural reinforcement, possesses continuity and therefore cannot be divided as men have attempted to do. That Bible teaches that past, present, and future are all one. It also teaches that the single most important component in the discussion of time is age or the effects of sin upon man and creation
•The present, sandwiched between the past and the future, is the infinitely small and minute moment in which the immeasurable and eternal Creator exists because from eternity’s perspective nothing is past, nor is anything future. It is a perceived and lived in the NOW by the Ancient of Days
Never is the starkness and contrast between God and his creation more evident than in the topics of non-duality, election, and determinism.
In duality the false teaching that emerges is that God does not possess the three main attributes that distinguish him from his creation, man, or any other created being. In short, duality suggests a mutual interdependence.
There is nothing that God needs, depends, or relies on for his existence. If this were so, God would not be God. Therefore, God is not dependent nor is there an interdependence between God and anyone else.
The attribute of omnipotence says that in God resides all power. There is no competing power God is opposing or fighting.
His omnipresence means that given the infinite size of the universe, God's presence is evident in all places and at all times. That also means an infinite God can 'compress' himself into a pillar of fire by night AND a cloud by day, OR he can be seen in the limitless celestial sky by night.
Creation itself reveals the omniscience of a Creator whose wisdom, creative genius and incomparable diversity all suggest a being whose mind is vastly superior to anything man could ever conceive, while all of this is initiated and framed within the context of God's holiness, righteousness, and glory.
The doctrine of election renders the blasphemous teaching of man's 'free-will' null and void.
Determinism implies a Creator with a creative purpose and design behind everything visible and invisible. Chance, chaos, and disorder could never produce what is evident to a rational mind . . . But then, is evolution rational? Is evolution science?