When did the devil fall?

Participant

Quote (Jodi Lee @ June 14 2010,13:37)

Quote (Ed J @ June 14 2010,06:54)

Quote (Jodi Lee @ June 14 2010,06:44)

The Christian character of Lucifer, the fallen angel named Satan, is an IMAGE of a FALSE gOD.

Hi Jodi,

Who's image is this referring to? (Rev.13:15)

God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Hi Ed J,

Hi Jodi,

Interesting

Ed J

June 14, 2010 at 5:58 pm#195917

chosenone

Participant

The Problem Of Evil
An interesting article on “Satan”.

The Fall Of Satan
THE fall of Satan is a fundamental factor in human and satanic theology. Like many another false notion, such as natural immortality, it is so vital to the spirit of error which pervades theology that no one seems to notice its absence from the pages of holy writ. It is blasphemy to deny it, though God has not spoken. But once we have our eyes opened to examine God’s revelation on this point, we see that the blasphemy is against the god of this world, who has blinded the minds of men lest the illumination of the glory of God should shine into their hearts.
Satan’s fall is only another and coarser form of Gnosticism, the “science, falsely so-called,” against which the spirit of God has warned the saints. It is the old, old, attempt to relieve God of the responsibility of the creation as we know it, and to shift its shadows to the shoulders of His creatures. The Gnostics divided this responsibility among many, and thus dissipated the blame. Today it is concentrated on Satan, the Slanderer, who deceived our parents in Eden. It did not seem to suggest itself to the Gnostic that his scheme was not only unscriptural but unscientific as well; that is, contrary to reason as well as revelation. It shelved the problem rather than solved it. It does not occur to the defenders of this satanic falsehood that it is not only absent from God’s Word, but no real relief in answering the question which it covers. If Satan fell, we must account for his fall. If the impulse was from within, or if it came from without, it is this which is responsible. Where did it come from?
In speaking of Satan, or the Slanderer, it will be of considerable advantage if we drop the common term “devil.” Satan is the Hebrew word for an adversary, and has not been corrupted by misuse. “Devil” is derived from the Greek diabolos, but it has been incurably corrupted by being applied to demons. Diabolos means slanderer. It is a common noun, and is applied to others besides the one who has it for a title. It has a definite and instructive significance, but “devil” has acquired a very different, though indefinite, meaning.
“That ancient serpent, the Slanderer and Satan” (Rev.20:2) is not known by name, but by descriptive, terms and titles. He is not the only adversary or the only slanderer, but he is the chief adversary of God and Christ, and the supreme Slanderer of God and man. He is the leader of the opposition in the divine government. It is his function to test and call in question, to thwart and to destroy every move made by God in His administration of the universe.
Let us suppose that Adam had been named “Sinner” instead of Adam. How would that have suited his circumstances before he fell? If we had no account of his transgression at the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, would we not have the strongest kind of suspicion that his name was an index of his true character? Adam became entitled to the name sinner just as soon as he became what the name describes.
So with Satan, the Slanderer, the ancient serpent and the dragon of the end time. He has many appellations, but is there one which redeems his character? Is there one that intimates that he ever was anything but an adversary and a slanderer? The statement that the Slanderer is sinning from the beginning is self evident because he would not be a slanderer if he was not a sinner. He must have been called by some other title if he was once righteous. Such is not revealed.
There is a strong tendency to ignore the plain revelations concerning Satan and to form a blurred, composite picture by confusing him with every other evil spirit, as our translators have done in the case of demons. The motive that prompts this is palpably the desire to prove that he is an excrescence on God’s creation, which has intruded contrary to God’s purpose and will and in spite of every precaution. The first step in this propaganda is to prove that Satan was originally perfect, so that God is not at all responsible for his subsequent default.
The various attempts to explain the entrance of sin into the universe are all essentially the same. The modern systems, though indignantly repudiating any connection with Gnosticism because it is denounced in the Scriptures, are really only a fragment of it. The Gnostics introduced evil by gradations. They invented a series of angelic castes, the highest created nearly perfect, and each lower level less so, until sin reached man. In this way they attempted to exonerate God from the charge of committing a great sin, but fastened on Him the responsibility of the primeval peccadillo. Of course, they did not look at it in this way. They thought they were clearing Him of all implication with sin.
Modern systems are not so elaborate. Pointing to Gen.1:2, they assure us that Adam’s fall was not the first. If we look back of Adam we find another “fall.” Modern minds being more easily muddled than the acute thinkers of the early centuries, it does not seem necessary to invent still another, “fall” before that, and so on ad infinitum.
It reminds me of a label I once saw, which puzzled my youthful, inquiring, but stubborn mind for some time. On the label was a picture of the label itself. Of course, on the picture of the label there must be a picture of the label, and on the picture of the picture there must be — . So I got a microscope and found that the artist had settled my difficulties very easily. He just made a little blot for the picture of the picture. That is the way theology tries to settle the origin of sin! It first seeks to reduce it so that our perceptions are unable to follow and then if any one insists on using a microscope it makes a blot on God’s character!
The principle is precisely the same as the “scientific” philosophy of evolution. First reduce everything to a mere speck of protoplasm and then — nothing! Men of God say rightly that it is foolish to reduce everything to a form for which there is no reason or evidence, merely to bludgeon our minds into the acceptance of a theory which it rejects when things are kept within the range of human perception. It is far more foolish for those whose minds have been enlightened by God’s spirit to use a similar course in connection with evil and sin. The problem is not changed though we invent ever so many “falls,” for which the Scriptures give no warrant.
Another point we must insist on if we are to be clear concerning these things. Not only do we read of no “fall” before Adam, we never read of the “fall” of Adam. Let no one mistake my meaning. That Adam sinned, transgressed, offended and became a dying creature with a variety of consequences is all too true. But God has never seen fit to use the term “fall” to denote the fact. Ordinarily we might overlook the use of a convenient term, but in this connection it is made the vehicle of obscure and unscriptural thoughts. Let any one try to transfer the facts and consequences of Adam’s “fall” to Satan, and he will soon be convinced that it is merely a blanket to cover ignorance. A return to Scriptural language will shed light.
The real usefulness of the term “fall” lies in the unproven assumption that sin has always come from without, as in Adam’s case, to a creature originally sinless. This would recoil on itself if it were carried to its logical conclusion. How many creatures in the chain suffered a “fall” and passed on the burden of sin makes no difference.
There was a first one. And we are driven to the horrible conclusion that God Himself must have played the role of serpent in the first instance! Should not this make us beware of embarking on this unscriptural and unreasonable philosophy?
If Satan fell, where is the evidence? The word “fall” is not used. The desperate need for some evidence is all that is proven by the appeal to passages which no sober student would have pressed into service otherwise.
The favorite passage for proving the original perfection and subsequent fall of Satan is found in the twenty-eighth chapter of Ezekiel. The “king of Tyrus,” we are told, is another name for the devil. His presence in Eden is perhaps the only fact which points that way. But this does not establish the identity of the serpent with the king of Tyre. We are never told that Satan was the only spirit who had access to the garden. Moreover, the creature in Ezekiel was perfect at that time, for surely it was not one of the glories of the king of Tyre to have been in that scene as the serpent, the adversary of God! This would put his “fall” subsequent to the great cataclysm of the second verse of Genesis, which, we are told, was a result of it.
The prince of Tyre is emphatically described as a man, a human being (Ezek.28:2,9). The king of Tyre was known among the people and his destruction was a matter of public astonishment. How can this apply to Satan? Those who have seen the ruins of Tyre and have some idea of its ancient magnificence will find nothing in this passage too wonderful to be accounted for. There is not the slightest hint that it concerns any one but the ruler of Tyre. If it involves the spiritual king of Tyre, corresponding with the “prince of Persia,” the “prince of Grecia,” or Michael, the prince of Israel (Dan.10:20,21) it is most unlikely that Satan should be assigned to a small kingdom like Tyre, or, indeed, any single kingdom, for he claims all kingdoms as his. Why should we give him such a subordinate place, simply to get a passage to prove that he once was perfect?
Moreover, it is always well to inquire what is intended by “perfect” in the Scriptures. The Greek has three words for “perfect,” and the Hebrew uses it for about six. It is questionable whether it ever denotes sinlessness. Any other meaning would be of little value in this discussion. The word used in Ezekiel 28:15 is tahmeem, meaning flawless. The A. V. renders it without blemish, complete, full, perfect, sincerely, sincerity, sound, without spot, undefiled, upright, uprightly, whole. It is most often found of the animals used in sacrifice. Noah was “perfect” (Gen.6:9) in his generations. This certainly does not mean that he was sinless. David said, “I was also upright perfect before Him.” Does this prove that David escaped the lot of all of Adam’s descendants up to this time? It is evident that the meaning is limited to apparent flaws, not to innate tendencies. It is not a question of sinlessness.
The same word “perfect,” is used in the passages which are usually adduced to prove that Satan was created sinless, such as “His work is perfect” (Deut.32:4), “As for God, His way is perfect” (2 Sam.22:31; Psa.18:30). It does not deny the great truth that all is of God. There is no flaw in the creation of a creature perfectly adapted to carry out a part of His purpose. Satan is as “perfect” in this sense as any of His creatures.
Still further, in the case of the Tyrian king, this perfection was in his ways, till iniquity was found in him. The iniquity did not come from without. It was in him while his ways were perfect, but undiscovered. This can easily be understood of a man, but cannot be applied to a sinless creature. Iniquity could not be found in such a one, for it is sure evidence that sin was already there.
Our ignorance of the spiritual forces of wickedness leads us to call them all “devils.” Thus our version calls the demons “devils,” and it is common to include Apollyon, the king of the monstrous locusts and messenger of the abyss, and every evil power of the unseen world, as a “devil.” There is only one Slanderer, and most of the minions of evil among the celestials are his messengers, as is seen under the figure of a dragon which drags a third of the heavenly host down with it.
Each kingdom or government of earth doubtless has a spiritual “prince” or overlord, under Satan’s suzerainty. We have been delivered from the authority of darkness. But Satan himself is never limited to one land. His peculiar province seems to be the aerial jurisdiction. He is sovereign over all, as he was the first of all to oppose the government of God. He did not offer our Lord the kingdoms of Tyre and Babylon as a reward for worship, but all the kingdoms of the earth, for he was over all.
Were we considering the end of Satan instead of his beginning, the very same expositors would absolutely refuse to accept their own identification, for, in the Authorized Version rendering, his practical annihilation is tersely stated thus: “and never shalt thou be any more.” Compare this with “The devil that deceived them…shall be tormented day, and night for ever and ever.” Changing “for ever” to “the eons” does not help the identification. There is no point in Satan’s career when he “shall not be.” The nearest approach is the thousand-year period, when he is bound, but the fact that he will be loosed and lead the largest host of his career in his final defection after that, makes it impossible to apply this passage to the Slanderer. The true reading, for the eon (LXX) would teach that Satan is not alive today! The king of Tyre was judged in the sight of those who knew his glory.
The fact that such a passage should be pressed altogether out of its proper place assures us that the underlying motive is false. If Satan was sinless from the beginning a plain passage could be found, and a false one need not be distorted. Compare the words in Ezekiel with those of John. In one we read of the king of Tyre, “Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee” (Ezek.38:15). The apostle was inspired to write, “the Slanderer is sinning from the beginning.” Suppose we falsely say “Adam was sinning from the beginning.” “No! No!” we hear our readers exclaim. “He did not sin until Eve was tempted by Satan.” What shall we believe, a fanciful inference, or God’s absolute declaration?
A favorite refuge from the plain and apparent sense, that Satan was a sinner and murderer from the beginning, is the suggestion that this dates from the beginning of man rather than Satan himself. The fact that such a statement could not have such a sense if applied in any other connection shows how desperate and hopeless this argument is. Moreover, the same expositors insist that all the evidences of sin, such as the cataclysm of Gen.1:2 are due to Satan! They occurred long before man came on the scene. Satan was a sinner, according to their own teaching, ages before Adam’s advent.
When was “the beginning?” As in the opening of John’s evangel, the article the is absent. The conception of an absolute beginning is outside the range of human comprehension. We cannot look back to any definite point of time and say, “Nothing — not even God — existed before this.” So, in Scripture, the word beginning has the definite article — the beginning — when the context definitely decides what is in view. When the article is absent, as here, we would probably use the indefinite article, “as a beginning,” or, when used of a person, the possessive pronoun, “his beginning.” The “beginning” is always limited by the immediate context. Here this is finally fixed by the title used. So long as the Slanderer was a slanderer he was a sinner. This, we are told, was “from the beginning.” No other deduction is possible but that sin began when he began.
Isaiah’s description of the King of Babylon in the yet future day of Israel’s restoration, is also taken as referring to Satan’s fall in the past (Isa.14:3-20):

How art thou fallen from heaven,
O, Lucifer, son of the morning!

As this is still future, it can hardly refer to Satan’s primeval “fall.” At that time Satan will have been literally cast out from heaven (Rev.12:9, compare Luke 10:18). But these facts give us no license to identify the two. There will be a king of Babylon who will arrogate divine horrors to hi
mself and who will lord it over the kings of the nations, and who will shake kingdoms. Yet he is a man (Isa.14:16), and Satan is not a man.
Moreover, an examination of the Hebrew text, will convince any one that the evidence for the title “Lucifer” is exceedingly slight. It is precisely the same word as the translators rendered “howl” in Zech.11:2. In the feminine it occurs again in this very chapter, at the beginning of verse 31. In slightly different forms it is found in Isaiah ten times, and it is always rendered howl (13:6; 15:2,3; 16:7,7; 23:1,6,14; 52:5; 65:14). There is no valid reason why Isaiah 14:12 should not be rendered, “Howl!” instead of “Lucifer.” This name is a human invention, and should have no place in the Scriptures.
Are not these futile efforts to find a foundation for the primeval perfection of the devil a tacit admission that no actual evidence exists? More than that, are they not desperate devices to disprove the clear, unequivocal statements that the Slanderer is sinning from the beginning (1 John 3:8), was a man-killer from the beginning (John 8:44), and is not only a liar, but the father of it?
Having disposed of passages which cannot be connected with Satan, it may be well to inquire whether we have not overlooked some which really have a bearing on his origin. We are perfectly safe so long as we keep to the titles given him in the Scripture — Serpent, Slanderer, and Satan. Is there any suggestion as to who brought the serpent into existence?
In Job 26:13, we read,

His hand hath formed the crooked serpent.

If this were the utterance of one of Job’s friends, we might well beware, lest it be merely human philosophy, for the Lord said, “ye have not spoken of Me the thing that is right, as My servant Job hath” (Job 42:7).
Besides, we must be careful to check the translation of the vital expressions. The Revisers change “formed” to “pierced,” yet the same word in 39:1 is left “the hinds do calve.” There is more consistency between “form” and “calve” than “pierce” and “calve,” yet the Revisers have made a change in the right direction. The Hebrew word ghool refers to the travail which accompanies birth (Isa.13:8; 23:4; 26:17; 54:1; 66:78). When Eliphaz used this word, the translators themselves rendered it, “the wicked man travaileth with pain” (Job 15:20) and the Revisers concur. This, it will be seen, is allied to both forming and piercing. How incongruous “pierce” is will be seen if we should render Deut.32:18, “thou hast forgotten God that pierced thee.” They had forgotten the God Who had suffered in the travail of their birth.
Coming back, now, to the serpent, Job declares that

By His spirit He garnished the heavens;
His hand has travailed with the fugitive serpent.

Note the contrast between the garnishing of the heavens by His spirit and the painful production of the serpent by His hand. The spirit is used of intimate and vital association, the hand holds its work at a distance and suggests power and skill, rather than communion.
The immediate application of these lines is, of course, to the material heavens. But no one who has studied the stars and their relation to holy writ, will fail to see a far deeper meaning. The stars are often used as figures of celestial powers, and in the ancient constellations, both Draconis and Serpens have always represented the Satan of Scripture. The Dragon’s tail drew a third part of the stars of heaven (Rev.12:4). This does not prove that we have here the divine description of Satan’s origin, but it is ever so much nearer a demonstration than the passages which are usually produced.
But there is one more link which will put the matter beyond question. Not only is the term serpent (Hebrew, nahghahsh the same as the name of Eve’s tempter in Eden’s garden (Gen.3:1,2,4,13,14), but Isaiah describes it in precisely the same terms, the fugitive serpent (Isa.27:1):

In that day Yahweh with His sore and great and strong sword,
Shall punish leviathan the fugitive serpent,
Even leviathan that crooked serpent;
And He shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.

The context clearly shows that this will be when the Lord comes to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity (Isa.26:21). Its connection with the twelfth chapter of the Unveiling is too close to deny. If Satan is that “ancient serpent” (Rev.20:2), how can we help identify him with Isaiah and Job and Genesis? All will acknowledge Genesis and Isaiah. As precisely the same name and descriptive term is used in Job as in Isaiah, the evidence is as conclusive as it can well be. The “fugitive serpent” of Job is the same as the “fugitive serpent” of Isaiah. The “fugitive” serpent of Job (A. V. “crooked”) and Isaiah seems to refer to the constellation Serpens, for it flees from the grasp of Ophiuchus. The “crooked” serpent of Isaiah may be Draco (or Draconis), which winds its way among the northern stars.
The Unveiling and Isaiah give us his end, Genesis and Job give us his beginning. He is not introduced to us in the garden as an angel of light, though such he simulates today. He was seen as a serpent. Job gives us his origin. The One Who has garnished the heavens — His hand was pained with the travail of bringing forth the serpent.
It is well to seek for truth in its proper place. The judgment of Tyre and Babylon is no place to look for the origin of Satan. Job, however, is speaking of the creation of the universe and the manner of its making. God hangs the earth on nothing. The clouds and the sea are all displays of His power. Each couplet includes both good and evil. So, in the heavens, He it is Who made all. It is an elaboration of the great truth that all is of God (Rom.11:36).
We are now able to appreciate the peculiar term which has puzzled the translators, so that some render it formed, others, pierced. The woman was not the first to travail in pain because of sin. Yahweh travailed when Satan, was formed. Sin and pain appear together.
Satan is now transformed into an angel of light, and many of the Lord’s own receive him as such. His ministers are ministers of righteousness, posing as the ministers of Christ. This deception is no greater than his successful entrance into theology and enlistment of many great and grand servants of Christ, in proof that he actually was an angel of light at the first.

A. E. Knoch

This publication may be reproduced for personal use
(all other rights reserved by copyright holder).

June 15, 2010 at 8:06 am#196070

Participant

Quote (Jodi Lee @ June 15 2010,01:07)

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 14 2010,14:09)

Quote (Jodi Lee @ June 14 2010,13:37)

Quote (Ed J @ June 14 2010,06:54)

Quote (Jodi Lee @ June 14 2010,06:44)

The Christian character of Lucifer, the fallen angel named Satan, is an IMAGE of a FALSE gOD.

Hi Jodi,

Who's image is this referring to? (Rev.13:15)

God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Hi Ed J,

hi jodi,
So you think we can be wrong about the devil?
okkkk so if there is a chance that we are wrong,
could you also admit you can be wrong as well?
What if your wrong?

Dont you think its humourous!!!?

Imagine how God is watching us, saying wow my two people here who are clearly divided in what they believe abuot me….
wow my peoples are fools for trying to be so intelligent.

Observations:
You state people believeing that Lucifer exists
1. for Ignorance
2. Repetition of false doctrine
3. delusional,
4. believing their own additions.

With alot of Love,

Consider God, more the alternatives.

Fear stating to have the whole truth, fear stating that this is truth, because your soul, reputation, and everything you are will be riding on that. You better hope it is true.

much love,

This is so typical.

Believing in another god over the Hebrew God YHWH, is shown by scripture to be FALSE BECAUSE there is NO OTHER BEING that EXISTS with POWERS, ONLY YHWH.

If a human being such as Moses, or Jesus, or another creature that comes down from God's abode uses supernatural powers, they do so via the Holy Spirit.

Typical i believe not.

Actually the error is not what was presented, because what was presented was only a piece of the overall error thats within your very mind.

Actually i already made several points. including a very long post. Im not going to make a circle of debates again to convince you. The thing is that you believe strongly in what you believe, unless your going to be open minded there is no point to debate more with you. I rather turn the other cheek.

You obviously didnt read my post. You reached a conclusion stating anyone who believes in these beliefs are igonarnt, yet i countered starting my oberservations that if i am ignorant than you are also.

Obviously you cant state that im compelelty ignorant of scriptures yet say that you are not.

1)IF you state that you are not, than your a liar.

2)If your humble enough to admit that you do not have the whole truth. 100 percent truth, than you and i are fools and slaves to God.

first of all i never believed in another God. There is no other God but God. duh.

Human beings abuot moses. duh.
Jesus not really he choose not to sin.

MAN is being compared to someone else.
It does when it says chreibum, and Eden, and mentions being PERFECT. WIth abosolute beauty, and the kings never served God previously to that scripture, because they were gentile kings who were wise and evil.

YEt the person mentioned
was a cheribum who was Perfect in beauty until inquity was found in him.

Even revelations (the book you havent read) paints a picture of the Dragon and his angels, vs Micheal and his angels.

Im stating what sciptures says. your stating that these Kings were Perfect, in Eden, and were cheribum, thats impossible. How can these evil kings be the model of perfection when they were always evil, they never served God. nor does scripture state that they ever did.

I never said that the devil controls the world.
Your stating thigns i havent said, and your assuming.

Stop speculating.

Scriptures states that God brings up kings and and make others fall, it does not say however that any of these kings were perfect.

If your going to debate that the scripture was literally calling the King perfect and wise, than There is already in error in your thinking.

Here is the differense between me and you. I consider all your points as if i was wrong. I put myself in your shoes. The thing is i consider your points and i am willing to be wrong. Becuase its about God.

Dont hold on to your beliefs or what you think is truth, hold on to God and God alone.
If he is real, and you say you believe, than you should know.

June 15, 2010 at 8:25 am#196073

Participant

Quote (chosenone @ June 15 2010,04:58)

If Satan fell, where is the evidence? The word “fall” is not used. The desperate need for some evidence is all that is proven by the appeal to passages which no sober student would have pressed into service otherwise.
The favorite passage for proving the original perfection and subsequent fall of Satan is found in the twenty-eighth chapter of Ezekiel. The “king of Tyrus,” we are told, is another name for the devil. His presence in Eden is perhaps the only fact which points that way. But this does not establish the identity of the serpent with the king of Tyre. We are never told that Satan was the only spirit who had access to the garden. Moreover, the creature in Ezekiel was perfect at that time, for surely it was not one of the glories of the king of Tyre to have been in that scene as the serpent, the adversary of God! This would put his “fall” subsequent to the great cataclysm of the second verse of Genesis, which, we are told, was a result of it.
The prince of Tyre is emphatically described as a man, a human being (Ezek.28:2,9). The king of Tyre was known among the people and his destruction was a matter of public astonishment. How can this apply to Satan? Those who have seen the ruins of Tyre and have some idea of its ancient magnificence will find nothing in this passage too wonderful to be accounted for. There is not the slightest hint that it concerns any one but the ruler of Tyre. If it involves the spiritual king of Tyre, corresponding with the “prince of Persia,” the “prince of Grecia,” or Michael, the prince of Israel (Dan.10:20,21) it is most unlikely that Satan should be assigned to a small kingdom like Tyre, or, indeed, any single kingdom, for he claims all kingdoms as his. Why should we give him such a subordinate place, simply to get a passage to prove that he once was perfect?
Moreover, it is always well to inquire what is intended by “perfect” in the Scriptures. The Greek has three words for “perfect,” and the Hebrew uses it for about six. It is questionable whether it ever denotes sinlessness. Any other meaning would be of little value in this discussion. The word used in Ezekiel 28:15 is tahmeem, meaning flawless. The A. V. renders it without blemish, complete, full, perfect, sincerely, sincerity, sound, without spot, undefiled, upright, uprightly, whole. It is most often found of the animals used in sacrifice. Noah was “perfect” (Gen.6:9) in his generations. This certainly does not mean that he was sinless. David said, “I was also upright perfect before Him.” Does this prove that David escaped the lot of all of Adam’s descendants up to this time? It is evident that the meaning is limited to apparent flaws, not to innate tendencies. It is not a question of sinlessness.
The same word “perfect,” is used in the passages which are usually adduced to prove that Satan was created sinless, such as “His work is perfect” (Deut.32:4), “As for God, His way is perfect” (2 Sam.22:31; Psa.18:30). It does not deny the great truth that all is of God. There is no flaw in the creation of a creature perfectly adapted to carry out a part of His purpose. Satan is as “perfect” in this sense as any of His creatures.
Still further, in the case of the Tyrian king, this perfection was in his ways, till iniquity was found in him. The iniquity did not come from without. It was in him while his ways were perfect, but undiscovered. This can easily be understood of a man, but cannot be applied to a sinless creature. Iniquity could not be found in such a one, for it is sure evidence that sin was already there.
Our ignorance of the spiritual forces of wickedness leads us to call them all “devils.” Thus our version calls the demons “devils,” and it is common to include Apollyon, the king of the monstrous locusts and messenger of the abyss, and every evil power of the unseen world, as a “devil.” There is only one Slanderer, and most of the minions of evil among the celestials are his messengers, as is seen under the figure of a dragon which drags a third of the heavenly host down with it.
Each kingdom or government of earth doubtless has a spiritual “prince” or overlord, under Satan’s suzerainty. We have been delivered from the authority of darkness. But Satan himself is never limited to one land. His peculiar province seems to be the aerial jurisdiction. He is sovereign over all, as he was the first of all to oppose the government of God. He did not offer our Lord the kingdoms of Tyre and Babylon as a reward for worship, but all the kingdoms of the earth, for he was over all.
Were we considering the end of Satan instead of his beginning, the very same expositors would absolutely refuse to accept their own identification, for, in the Authorized Version rendering, his practical annihilation is tersely stated thus: “and never shalt thou be any more.” Compare this with “The devil that deceived them…shall be tormented day, and night for ever and ever.” Changing “for ever” to “the eons” does not help the identification. There is no point in Satan’s career when he “shall not be.” The nearest approach is the thousand-year period, when he is bound, but the fact that he will be loosed and lead the largest host of his career in his final defection after that, makes it impossible to apply this passage to the Slanderer. The true reading, for the eon (LXX) would teach that Satan is not alive today! The king of Tyre was judged in the sight of those who knew his glory.
The fact that such a passage should be pressed altogether out of its proper place assures us that the underlying motive is false. If Satan was sinless from the beginning a plain passage could be found, and a false one need not be distorted. Compare the words in Ezekiel with those of John. In one we read of the king of Tyre, “Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee” (Ezek.38:15). The apostle was inspired to write, “the Slanderer is sinning from the beginning.” Suppose we falsely say “Adam was sinning from the beginning.” “No! No!” we hear our readers exclaim. “He did not sin until Eve was tempted by Satan.” What shall we believe, a fanciful inference, or God’s absolute declaration?
A favorite refuge from the plain and apparent sense, that Satan was a sinner and murderer from the beginning, is the suggestion that this dates from the beginning of man rather than Satan himself. The fact that such a statement could not have such a sense if applied in any other connection shows how desperate and hopeless this argument is. Moreover, the same expositors insist that all the evidences of sin, such as the cataclysm of Gen.1:2 are due to Satan! They occurred long before man came on the scene. Satan was a sinner, according to their own teaching, ages before Adam’s advent.
When was “the beginning?” As in the opening of John’s evangel, the article the is absent. The conception of an absolute beginning is outside the range of human comprehension. We cannot look back to any definite point of time and say, “Nothing — not even God — existed before this.” So, in Scripture, the word beginning has the definite article — the beginning — when the context definitely decides what is in view. When the article is absent, as here, we would probably use the indefinite article, “as a beginning,” or, when used of a person, the possessive pronoun, “his beginning.” The “beginning” is always limited by the immediate context. Here this is finally fixed by the title used. So long as the Slanderer was a slanderer he was a sinner. This, we are told, was “from the beginning.” No other deduction is possible but that sin began when he began.
Isaiah’s description of the King of Babylon in the ye
t future day of Israel’s restoration, is also taken as referring to Satan’s fall in the past (Isa.14:3-20):

How art thou fallen from heaven,
O, Lucifer, son of the morning!

As this is still future, it can hardly refer to Satan’s primeval “fall.” At that time Satan will have been literally cast out from heaven (Rev.12:9, compare Luke 10:18). But these facts give us no license to identify the two. There will be a king of Babylon who will arrogate divine horrors to himself and who will lord it over the kings of the nations, and who will shake kingdoms. Yet he is a man (Isa.14:16), and Satan is not a man.
Moreover, an examination of the Hebrew text, will convince any one that the evidence for the title “Lucifer” is exceedingly slight. It is precisely the same word as the translators rendered “howl” in Zech.11:2. In the feminine it occurs again in this very chapter, at the beginning of verse 31. In slightly different forms it is found in Isaiah ten times, and it is always rendered howl (13:6; 15:2,3; 16:7,7; 23:1,6,14; 52:5; 65:14). There is no valid reason why Isaiah 14:12 should not be rendered, “Howl!” instead of “Lucifer.” This name is a human invention, and should have no place in the Scriptures.
Are not these futile efforts to find a foundation for the primeval perfection of the devil a tacit admission that no actual evidence exists? More than that, are they not desperate devices to disprove the clear, unequivocal statements that the Slanderer is sinning from the beginning (1 John 3:8), was a man-killer from the beginning (John 8:44), and is not only a liar, but the father of it?
Having disposed of passages which cannot be connected with Satan, it may be well to inquire whether we have not overlooked some which really have a bearing on his origin. We are perfectly safe so long as we keep to the titles given him in the Scripture — Serpent, Slanderer, and Satan. Is there any suggestion as to who brought the serpent into existence?
In Job 26:13, we read,

Hi Co,

thats all i read so far.

Maybe shorten it up a bit.

Intresting.

I Think fall needs to be looked at two diffrent ways, from eitehr literally falling. or as falling from grace, in other words away from God.

I like the part that he compares perfection to Noah and David. I have used that same notion in my thesis. What did the writer mean by perfection in other words Tamim in hebrew or Teleios in Greek, when refferring to an individual.

From my studies, The perfection had nothing to do with sin or their limited, or imperfection. The perfection was the open heart, or in other words the relationship they had with God.

I refer the same to Satan yet i believe the bible says he was the model of perfection, having beauty, wisdom and might.

I read most of the post you wrote.

Im sleepy.

Anyway you can give me the main points that are more direct to what its saying?

June 15, 2010 at 8:34 am#196075

Participant

Quote (Jodi Lee @ June 14 2010,15:03)

Quote (Ed J @ June 14 2010,07:05)

Quote (Jodi Lee @ June 14 2010,06:44)

Biblical FACT tells us directly that it is YHWH who makes the deaf, the blind, the dumb, and the mad, and we are told that it is HE ALONE that brings forth cursing and calamity, that it is HE who FORMS the DARKNESS.

HI Jodi,

How do you explain this verse for all of us here? (2Cor.4:4)

2Cor.4:3-4 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them
which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ,
who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

Hi Ed J,

Philippians 3:18 For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: 19 whose end is destruction, whose god is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame–who set their mind on earthly things.

Romans 6:12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. 15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one's slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. 18 And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness. 20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. 22 But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

1 John 2:16 FOR ALL THAT IS IN the world–the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life–is not of the Father but is of the world.

James 1:14 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. 15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.

Man is NO DIFFERENT from the animals, how do animals behave? How does a beast or serpent behave?…..they behave according to their flesh, according to their nature, according to their survival instincts!!!

No spooks or fallen angels going around jumping in and out of people, manipulating, influencing, or controlling them, just MAN and HIS OWN FLESH, his OWN BELLY BEING his god!!

Hi jodi,
Wow you have never seen a demon?
I have seen people, Tortured and demonized

Nothing psychological nor mental nor physical circumstance could explain it.

not to get too personal.

I had to be delivered from a Demon once in my life. Its not game. I would hope you would be right, and for it not be real. But the thing is believe it or not, i had my own experience, and i know the difference.

I have seen things that only scripture can explain.

There are so many scriptures that explain that Evil forces do exist.

Such as Jesus vs two demons who were sent into pigs.
Or the angels who were going to be tied up and tortured in chains.

there are so many biblical verses that explain this yet you stick to those that refer to man, and than say that its only man. Its more than that.

Observation:
1) You use scriptures that only refer to man.
2) By only using scriputres that refer to man, its obvious why you are lead to such conclusions.

June 15, 2010 at 3:29 pm#196105

Participant

SF…………..Jodi was not denying that Evil (forces) exist, she was Just saying these forces are (IN) men not external of them. There is no such thing a Satan (BEING) going around jumping in and out of People. That does not mean evil (SPIRIT) (intellects) are not (In) people. Evil is a force that works in ALL the childern of disobedience. WE all at times are satans, or (adversaries) of God, Just as Jesus said Peter was at the time when He resisted Jesus. Judas as well as the Pharisees were to. Evil will be removed from the earth during the thousand year period and placed in a bottomless pit, the reason it is bottomless, is because Evil has (NO) End , Nor does GOOD either. They both are eternal tenets of LIFE for ever. One describes the other they are necessary to understand the (WAY) of Life. We need to learn to LOVE the GOOD and HATE the EVIL. IMO

peace and love……………..gene

June 15, 2010 at 3:53 pm#196111

Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 16 2010,02:29)

peace and love……………..gene

Hi Gene,

Still haven't heard from you HERE <– Sixth Post down

June 15, 2010 at 4:08 pm#196113

Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 16 2010,02:29)

peace and love……………..gene

Hi Gene,

So Job's problems only existed in his mind?
What you present makes no sense.

Plus you have no further comments on this…
YHVH allowed the Romans with the Jews consent to kill [יהשוע] YÄ-shü-ă; does that make YHVH a murder?
If a Christian in an Arabic country refuses to recant their faith, does this mean their death is considered a suicide?
If terrorists in a shopping mall, pulls a knife on someone and you watch it happen, does that make an accomplice?
God allowed satan’s “Free Will” to torture Job, but God was in NO way responsible for what satan had done to Job!

Elihu clearly did NOT blame YHVH; Why would you?
Who say you were Elihu and YHVH referring to? (Matt.18:16)

Clearly YHVH is speaking to Job from Job 38:1 through to Job 42:6
Job 38:2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?

Elihu is clearly referring to Job, yet gets NO reprimand from YHVH. (Job 42:7-9)
Job 35:16 Therefore doth Job open his mouth in vain; he multiplieth words without knowledge.

And in the end Job says in Job 42:6…
Job 42:6 Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in dust and ashes.
It seems Job felt he was wrong for blaming his troubles on YHVH! (Job 1:12 / Job 2:6)

God bless
Ed J
http://www.holycitybiblecode.org

June 16, 2010 at 4:46 am#197308

Participant

ED J …….YOU reasoning is wrong, GOD takes (FULL) Responsibility for (EVERYTHING) in EXISTENCE, rather GOOD OR EVIL. An Yes he has Killed millions of People Himself causing and brining it on them. Anyone who has read the old testament accounts can easily understand that. You are trying to make it out to be like the cause of something is not responsible for the action . So did Hitler really kill the Jews, was he really responsible himself for the deaths. Was King David really responsible for the death of Uriah the Hittite, after all He was not the one who personally killed him was he, maybe we could blame it on Joab, after all he carried out Davids Orders. God is in total control and takes responsibly for all thing that happen and can alter or change anything he so desires to. He alone is GOD, and Has created and allowed (ALL) things that exist, rather Good or Evil. AlL things are created by Him and serve His Purposes and His purposes will stand. IMO

peace and love…………………..gene

June 16, 2010 at 4:52 am#197310

Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 16 2010,15:46)

ED J …….YOU reasoning is wrong, GOD takes (FULL) Responsibility for (EVERYTHING) in EXISTENCE, rather GOOD OR EVIL.

peace and love…………………..gene

Hi Gene,

Does God also take full responsibility for those who rebel against him?

June 16, 2010 at 5:33 am#197320

Participant

ED J……….God has (FULL) responsibility of (ALL) things, and allows what he allows and prevents what He Choses to Prevent. If you were not a “FREE” WILLER'S You could understand these things , But all “FREE WILLER'S” are a GOD unto themselves so they believe (THEY) ARE in Charge and responsible for all their action including their salvation , so in a sense they are a God unto themselves. They profess GOD, but DENY the POWER thereof, AS scripture says they do.

peace and love………………..gene

June 16, 2010 at 5:40 am#197321

Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 16 2010,16:33)

peace and love………………..gene

Hi Gene,

Eph.4:18 Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of
God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:
Rom.1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither
were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

June 16, 2010 at 2:02 pm#197357

Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 16 2010,16:33)

peace and love………………..gene

Gene,

Quote

If you were not a “FREE” WILLER'S You could understand these things ,

dont blame me, dare to blame God. I dare you.
since he has full responsibility, therefore i have no fault.
Therefore i was meant to choose these things. So your saying its Gods fault, than argue with him your points.

Salvation is a hand that God offers to a sinner who is about to fall from a cliff, the sinner can either accept it or refuse it.

its as simple as that. We know how to love, because he loved first, but because of his love, I love him. not because he forced me, not because he twisted my mind, I made a Choice. I chose God.

And God has always chosen myself and others who wants to love him back.

2Chron.16:9: For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the whole earth,
to show himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him…

define a perfect heart for me.
God searches for the open heart. God searches.
God is to holy, to be responsible for evil, this is blasphemy.

Habakkuk 1:13 “Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil”

God hates evil.

How can you hate something that you are responsible for.
therefore you saying that God made a mistake.

Open your own mind.

You talking about freeing ones mind.
I hope Jesus frees your mind, because its capitivated.
no offense.

June 17, 2010 at 12:33 pm#197610

Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 16 2010,16:33)

peace and love………………..gene

Hi Gene,

Are these more verses that you have missing from 'your captive will bible'?
Hebrews 6:4-6 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened,
and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the HolySpirit,
And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they
crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

June 18, 2010 at 3:05 am#197808

942767

Participant

Quote (SimplyForgiven @ June 04 2010,17:25)

Quote (942767 @ June 04 2010,08:07)

Hi SF:

You say about the devil:

Quote

Im asking when did the Devil orginaly fall form his orginal position.
He was once a good cheribum who followed Gods will,
When did he fall?

What scripture or scriptures support the comment above in particular your statement, “he was once a good cheribum who followed Gods will”.

Love in Christ,
Marty

Ezekial 28.

look it up for urself.

Ok SF:

I looked it up. Here is what it says:

Quote

Ezekiel 28

1The word of the LORD came again unto me, saying,

2Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:

3Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee:

4With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures:

5By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:

6Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God;

7Behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness.

8They shall bring thee down to the pit, and thou shalt die the deaths of them that are slain in the midst of the seas.

9Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee.

10Thou shalt die the deaths of the uncircumcised by the hand of strangers: for I have spoken it, saith the Lord GOD.

11Moreover the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,

12Son of man, take up a lamentation upon the king of Tyrus, and say unto him, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Thou sealest up the sum, full of wisdom, and perfect in beauty.

13Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created.

14Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.

15Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.

16By the multitude of thy merchandise they have filled the midst of thee with violence, and thou hast sinned: therefore I will cast thee as profane out of the mountain of God: and I will destroy thee, O covering cherub, from the midst of the stones of fire.

17Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.

18Thou hast defiled thy sanctuaries by the multitude of thine iniquities, by the iniquity of thy traffick; therefore will I bring forth a fire from the midst of thee, it shall devour thee, and I will bring thee to ashes upon the earth in the sight of all them that behold thee.

19All they that know thee among the people shall be astonished at thee: thou shalt be a terror, and never shalt thou be any more.

The scriptures are speaking of a man, the king of Tyrus in an self-exalted state, but since he is speaking about a man this also relates to Adam who was God's anointed in the Garden of
Eden until he sinned and was cast out into the world by God.

Love in Christ,
Marty

June 18, 2010 at 5:05 am#197858

Participant

Quote (Ed J @ June 17 2010,23:33)

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 16 2010,16:33)

peace and love………………..gene

Hi Gene,

ED J………So you GOD has no authority except what your so-called “FREE” WILL Allows him to have , how convenient for you so you can using him as a hip pocket GOD when ever your “FREE” Will desires. You so-called “FREE WILL” seem to be your savior so why do you need GOD , Just keep trusting in your own “FREE” Will right?. Pure garbage . If you would have studied the scripture you quoted in Hebrews, you would understand that is actually saying it is (IMPOSSIBLE) for those who have GOD's Spirit in them to fall away. I realize you “FREE” Weller's Hate that , because it takes your power in your self salvation out of your hand and destroys the Pride in you. FOR THE CALLING OF GOD IS WITHOUT REVOCATION.

Here is something for you “FREE Wellers can to chew on….

Rom 11.29 For the gifts and calling of GOD are (without) repentance (irrevocable) 30…> For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief,…31..> Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy…32..> For God has (concluded) them (ALL) in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon (ALL). 33…> O the depth of the riches both of wisdom and knowledge of GOD! How unsearchable are his Judgements and his way past finding out.

How hard is that for a “FREE” Weller to except.?

peace and love………………..gene

June 18, 2010 at 5:50 am#197868

Participant

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 18 2010,16:05)

Quote (Ed J @ June 17 2010,23:33)

Quote (Gene Balthrop @ June 16 2010,16:33)

peace and love………………..gene

Hi Gene,

ED J………So you GOD has no authority except what your so-called “FREE” WILL Allows him to have , how convenient for you so you can using him as a hip pocket GOD when ever your “FREE” Will desires. You so-called “FREE WILL” seem to be your savior so why do you need GOD , Just keep trusting in your own “FREE” Will right?. Pure garbage . If you would have studied the scripture you quoted in Hebrews, you would understand that is actually saying it is (IMPOSSIBLE) for those who have GOD's Spirit in them to fall away. I realize you “FREE” Weller's Hate that , because it takes your power in your self salvation out of your hand and destroys the Pride in you. FOR THE CALLING OF GOD IS WITHOUT REVOCATION.

Here is something for you “FREE Wellers can to chew on….

How hard is that for a “FREE” Weller to except.?

peace and love………………..gene

Hi Gene,

See your reflection again? (Ps.18:25-27)
Who is holding 'your captive will' captive?
This verse is about the entity that 'you say' doesn't exist.
Job 41:34: He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.

June 18, 2010 at 8:01 am#197906