Did the Devil Retain His Power? Revisited, Still No

Did the Devil Retain His Power? No · Did the Devil Retain His Power? Revisited, Still No

Taylor Alesia was making a point that fame as an artist comes to those who are favoured by "the prince of this world" ...

Her Bible quote was II Cor 4:4, which reads: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not shine unto them.

Now, what does the Haydock comment say?

Ver. 4. In whom the God of this world hath blinded the minds of unbelievers.[1] Thus the words are placed, both in the Latin and Greek text, so that the true God seems to be called the God of this world, as he is elsewhere called the God of heaven, the God of Abraham. God, says St. Chrysostom, blinded, that is, permitted them to be blinded. Others translate, in whom God hat blinded the minds of the infidels of this world; so that this world may be joined with unbelievers, and not with God: and by the God of this world, some understand the devil, called sometimes the prince of this world, that is, of the wicked. (Witham)

So, one can read this as God, the true and good God, blinds the minds of unbelievers. And this means, He permits them to blind themselves.

Not because He loves falsehood, but because the blindness is a punishment. These had already chosen some falsehood or evil (like the circular proof of "Heliocentrism with Newton shows the Solar System works without God, and there being no God shows the Solar System has no other solution than Heliocentrism with Newton" (usually not pronounced in the same moment, the self deception requires some distancing from the very obvious vicious circle)).

But suppose we read instead "God of this world" = "prince of this world" = "the devil"?

Well, it still doesn't mean Satan retains his powers over mankind as prince of the world, he was judged at Calvary, it means he is the one falsely adored by those who refuse to adore the true God.

So, still no proof that seeking literary or artistic fame would depend on striking a deal with the Devil ... but here is more to take from the question:

The footnote [1] reads:
[1] Ver. 4. In quibus Deus hujus sæculi excæcavit mentes infidelium, en ois o Theos tou aionos toutou etuphlose ta noemata ton apiston. St. Chrysostom, om. e. p. 594. lin. 11. says, it should be read thus: anagnosteon, oti ton apiston tou aionos toutou, etuphlosen o theos [] oemata.

The Latin and Greek positions of the words would permit taking it as "unbelievers of this world" ... yes, even if the Genitive is normally placed after the main noun, and next to it, you can both have a Genitive before and also words inserted between. For instance, if the main noun is also a Genitive, as is the case, that one and its Genitive can surround the main main noun.

Wonder how St. Thomas takes it?

Causa ergo huius occultationis est non ex parte Evangelii, sed propter eorum culpam et malitiam. Et hoc est quod subdit in quibus Deus huius saeculi, et cetera. Et hoc potest exponi tribus modis. Primo modo sic: Deus huius saeculi, id est Deus qui est dominus huius saeculi et omnium rerum creatione et natura, iuxta illud Ps. XXIII, 1: domini est terra, et plenitudo eius, orbis terrarum, excaecavit mentes infidelium, non inducendo malitiam, sed merito, imo demerito praecedentium peccatorum subtrahendo gratiam. Is. VI, 10: excaeca cor populi huius, et cetera. Unde et praecedentia peccata insinuat, cum dicit infidelium, quasi infidelitas eorum fuerit causa huius excaecationis. Secundo modo sic: Deus huius saeculi, id est Diabolus, qui dicitur Deus huius saeculi, id est saeculariter viventium, non creatione sed imitatione, qua saeculares eum imitantur. Sap. II, 25: imitantur eum, qui sunt, et cetera. Et hic excaecat suggerendo, trahendo et inclinando ad peccata. Et sic quando iam sunt in peccatis, operiuntur in tenebris peccatorum ne videant. Eph. IV, 18: tenebris obscuratum habentes intellectum, et cetera. Tertio modo sic: Deus habet rationem ultimi finis, et complementum desideriorum totius creaturae. Unde quidquid aliquis sibi pro fine ultimo constituit in quo eius desiderium quiescit, potest dici Deus illius. Unde cum habes pro fine delicias, tunc deliciae dicuntur Deus tuus; similiter etiam si voluptates carnis, vel honores. Et tunc exponitur sic: Deus huius saeculi, id est illud quod homines saeculariter viventes sibi pro fine constituunt, ut puta voluptates, vel divitiae et huiusmodi. Et sic Deus excaecat mentes, inquantum impedit ne homines lumen gratiae hic, et gloriae in futuro, videre possint.

Commentarium in Secundam ad Corinthios
(scroll down to Caput 4, Lectio 2, I'm only quoting part)
https://www.corpusthomisticum.org/c2c.html

So, "the God of this world" means three different things, that blind unbelievers in three different ways:

• God takes away the grace as punishment;
• the Devil by tempting;
• the false gods or ends, by distracting.

They are also called "the God of this world" in three different ways:

• God is the owner and creator of not just Heaven but also Earth and all that is in it;
• the Devil is the God or Role Model of all worldly people;
• whatever you worship is your God, so for instance money or fame is worshipped, not just desired, but worshipped, by some.

We do not have any reason to believe from this that all media and all famous and powerful people are ultimately controlled by the Devil, since the true God can also give fame and power and that to people who seek Him.
/Hans Georg Lundahl