[Milton-L] Knowledge, free will, etc.

[jonnyangel]

I Tivoed ŒGod on Trial¹ but haven¹t watched it yet. For those who didn¹t
know about it, didn¹t tape it and are interested in seeing it you can watch
it online here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/godontrial/watch.html

And as for my question about Judas, I thought it might be interesting to put
him in conversation with the question of God¹s ³wanting² Satan to succeed in
his temptation(s). Similar questions have been debated and argued for years
in Christian Theology regarding Judas¹ betrayal of Christ. And actually, Roy
Flannagan has a pretty interesting paper he wrote on Judas I just read
called ³Headlong Judas² which ties Judas to Satan in PL (thanks for that,
Roy). 

I think it¹s pretty clear in PL and PR that God didn¹t want Satan to succeed
in his temptation of Eve or The Son, but rather allowed Satan his shot(s).
There are references in PL to what worth is free will if it¹s not
³exercised¹, and in PR of The Son¹s ³merit² -

This perfect Man, by merit call'd my Son,
To earn Salvation for the Sons of men. [PR I:166-7]

Also with PR and Job, Satan didn¹t succeed in defeating Job or The Son,
although he was allowed by God to put Job and The Son to the ultimate test.
Satan in PL (VI?) speaks to trying reason but in PR (the idea also present
in Job) The Son says to Satan and the End of Book I:

Thy coming hither, though I know thy scope,
I bid not or forbid; do as thou find'st
Permission from above; thou canst not more. [PR I: 494-6]

This clearly is just an off the top of my head-drop in the proverbial bucket
as to why it should be obvious that God didn¹t want Satan to succeed in his
temptations, rather God merely ³allowed² Satan his temptations; the rest
fell squarely on the shoulders of those tempted to exercise their free
choice and make the correct one. In other words, the ³Devil made me do it²
is hogwash in the face of free will, as is blaming God for allowing the
temptation in the first place. The Son address this clearly when he says
³thou canst not more².
God himself also address this issue in PL: Sufficient to have stood, though
free to fall [PL III:99]) etc. ³Sufficient² being the key word here.

I think Milton makes it clear what God wants, and I think it should be clear
that God did not want Satan to succeed in his temptations to fit any ³grand
scheme². 



salâm alaikum,

Jonathan 









On 11/11/08 2:47 PM, "Nancy Charlton" <pastorale55 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I have two thoughts on reading this thread, started by jonnyangel asking why
> the list hasn't discussed Judas:
> 
> 1. Judas--or any other story or character in the New Testament is not the
> concern of Milton in PL, so however relevant those might be, they lie outside
> the discussion.
> 
> 2. Speaking of theodicies, did anyone see the PBS Masterpiece Sunday night,
> "God on Trial"? It seemed a thoughtful piece, but for some reason there was
> tremendous static on my TV which drowned out the last five minutes of it. In
> this play, some prisoners at Auschwitz put God on trial for murder, and the
> dialog is an examination of issues not unlike those of PR and Samson
> Agonistes. I'm rather at a loss to relate it to the theodicial premise of PL
> because I didn't hear it all (and didn't want to watch the 3 a.m. rerun).
> 
> Nancy Charlton
> 
> 
> 
> Nancy Charlton
> http://groups.google.com/group/paradiselostdaily
> 
> . . . Till old experience do attain
> To something like prophetic strain.  (Il Penseroso)
> 
> --- On Tue, 11/11/08, Margaret Thickstun <mthickst at hamilton.edu> wrote:
>> From: Margaret Thickstun <mthickst at hamilton.edu>
>> Subject: Re: [Milton-L] Knowledge, free will, etc.
>> To: "John Milton Discussion List" <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
>> Date: Tuesday, November 11, 2008, 11:21 AM
>> 
>>  Jeffrey--thank you for the thoughtful post in response to Michael Grattan's
>> questions.  In response to yours, below, I think this might have been a
>> question Milton was asking--he certainly emends and modifies the Genesis
>> story as much as the bare bones of the narrative will allow.  But,
>> ultimately, the Genesis story requires both expulsion and death, and, in real
>> life, humans do die.  A person who believes the Scripture must be true in
>> some way and is explaining reality can not completely rewrite the story.
>> 
>> So your question seems more a question about theodicy than a question about
>> Milton.--Margie
>> 
>> Horace Jeffery Hodges wrote:
>>>    
>>>  
>>>  The question that arises -- for me anyway -- is this: why could God not
>>> have created free beings whose choice of disobedience did not cut them off
>>> from the source of life, but rather resulted in a lesser punishment, e.g.,
>>> expulsion from the Garden. On this point, I don't know enough about Milton.
>>> Perhaps he thought that a fateful choice was necessary for a truly free
>>> individual, namely, that to be radically free, an individual must be able to
>>> utterly reject God, damn the consequences.
>>>   
>>>  What do others think?
>>>   
>>>  Jeffery Hodges
>>>      
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Milton-L mailing list
>>> Milton-L at lists.richmond.edu
>>> Manage your list membership and access list archives at
>>> http://lists.richmond.edu/mailman/listinfo/milton-l
>>> 
>>> Milton-L web site: http://johnmilton.org/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20081111/8250a6ff/attachment.html