T
texrec
Guest
Where in scripture is the fall of Lucifer and the rise of Satan described?
- Status
B
buffalo
Guest
** II. THE FALL OF THE ANGELS **
[391](javascript
penWindow(‘cr/391.htm’)
Behind the disobedient choice of our first parents lurks a seductive voice, opposed to God, which makes them fall into death out of envy.266 Scripture and the Church’s Tradition see in this being a fallen angel, called “Satan” or the “devil”.267 The Church teaches that Satan was at first a good angel, made by God: "The devil and the other demons were indeed created naturally good by God, but they became evil by their own doing."268
[392](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/392.htm’) Scripture speaks of a sin of these angels.269 This “fall” consists in the free choice of these created spirits, who radically and irrevocably *rejected *God and his reign. We find a reflection of that rebellion in the tempter’s words to our first parents: "You will be like God."270 The devil “has sinned from the beginning”; he is “a liar and the father of lies”.271
[393](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/393.htm’) It is the *irrevocable *character of their choice, and not a defect in the infinite divine mercy, that makes the angels’ sin unforgivable. "There is no repentance for the angels after their fall, just as there is no repentance for men after death."272
[394](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/394.htm’) Scripture witnesses to the disastrous influence of the one Jesus calls “a murderer from the beginning”, who would even try to divert Jesus from the mission received from his Father.273 "The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil."274 In its consequences the gravest of these works was the mendacious seduction that led man to disobey God.
[395](javascriptpenWindow(‘cr/395.htm’) The power of Satan is, nonetheless, not infinite. He is only a creature, powerful from the fact that he is pure spirit, but still a creature. He cannot prevent the building up of God’s reign. Although Satan may act in the world out of hatred for God and his kingdom in Christ Jesus, and although his action may cause grave injuries - of a spiritual nature and, indirectly, even of a physical nature- to each man and to society, the action is permitted by divine providence which with strength and gentleness guides human and cosmic history. It is a great mystery that providence should permit diabolical activity, but "we know that in everything God works for good with those who love him."275
266 Cf. Gen 3:1-5; Wis 2:24.
267 Cf Jn 8:44; Rev 12:9.
268 Lateran Council IV (1215): DS 800.
269 Cf. 2 Pet 2:4.
270 Gen 3:5.
271 1 Jn 3:8; Jn 8:44.
272 St. John Damascene, De Fide orth. 2,4: PG 94,877.
273 Jn 8:44; cf. Mt 4:1-11.
274 1 Jn 3:8.
275 Rom 8:28.
[391](javascript
penWindow(‘cr/391.htm’) Behind the disobedient choice of our first parents lurks a seductive voice, opposed to God, which makes them fall into death out of envy.266 Scripture and the Church’s Tradition see in this being a fallen angel, called “Satan” or the “devil”.267 The Church teaches that Satan was at first a good angel, made by God: "The devil and the other demons were indeed created naturally good by God, but they became evil by their own doing."268[392](javascript
penWindow(‘cr/392.htm’) Scripture speaks of a sin of these angels.269 This “fall” consists in the free choice of these created spirits, who radically and irrevocably *rejected *God and his reign. We find a reflection of that rebellion in the tempter’s words to our first parents: "You will be like God."270 The devil “has sinned from the beginning”; he is “a liar and the father of lies”.271[393](javascript
penWindow(‘cr/393.htm’) It is the *irrevocable *character of their choice, and not a defect in the infinite divine mercy, that makes the angels’ sin unforgivable. "There is no repentance for the angels after their fall, just as there is no repentance for men after death."272[394](javascript
penWindow(‘cr/394.htm’) Scripture witnesses to the disastrous influence of the one Jesus calls “a murderer from the beginning”, who would even try to divert Jesus from the mission received from his Father.273 "The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil."274 In its consequences the gravest of these works was the mendacious seduction that led man to disobey God.[395](javascript
penWindow(‘cr/395.htm’) The power of Satan is, nonetheless, not infinite. He is only a creature, powerful from the fact that he is pure spirit, but still a creature. He cannot prevent the building up of God’s reign. Although Satan may act in the world out of hatred for God and his kingdom in Christ Jesus, and although his action may cause grave injuries - of a spiritual nature and, indirectly, even of a physical nature- to each man and to society, the action is permitted by divine providence which with strength and gentleness guides human and cosmic history. It is a great mystery that providence should permit diabolical activity, but "we know that in everything God works for good with those who love him."275266 Cf. Gen 3:1-5; Wis 2:24.
267 Cf Jn 8:44; Rev 12:9.
268 Lateran Council IV (1215): DS 800.
269 Cf. 2 Pet 2:4.
270 Gen 3:5.
271 1 Jn 3:8; Jn 8:44.
272 St. John Damascene, De Fide orth. 2,4: PG 94,877.
273 Jn 8:44; cf. Mt 4:1-11.
274 1 Jn 3:8.
275 Rom 8:28.
J
Joe_5859
Guest
If you look at the section in the Catechism on the Fall of the Angels (CCC 391-395), you can find the Scriptural references in the footnotes:
John 8:44 - You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.
Revelation 12:9 - And the great dragon was thrown down, that ancient serpent, who is called the Devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world–he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him.
2 Peter 2:4 - For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment;
1 John 3:8 - He who commits sin is of the devil; for the devil has sinned from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil.
Hopefully these verses help to answer your question?
J
Joe_5859
Guest
I guess Buffalo and I were working on our posts at the same time! Good to know we were thinking along the same lines!
C
ckempston
Guest
More to the point of the actual question: it doesn’t, at least not together. There is no passage in the Bible which connects the title Lucifer to Satan. This title was an honorific for the king of Babylon. The only time this title appears in the Bible is in Isaiah 14:12. The idea that Lucifer = Satan didn’t come around until well into the middle ages.
B
buffalo
Guest
Lucifer
The name Lucifer originally denotes the planet Venus, emphasizing its brilliance. The Vulgate employs the word also for “the light of the morning” (Job 11:17), “the signs of the zodiac” (Job 38:32), and “the aurora” (Psalm 109:3). Metaphorically, the word is applied to the King of Babylon (Isaiah 14:12) as preeminent among the princes of his time; to the high priest Simon son of Onias (Ecclesiasticus 50:6), for his surpassing virtue, to the glory of heaven (Apocalypse 2:28), by reason of its excellency; finally to Jesus Christ himself (2 Peter 1:19; Apocalypse 22:16; the “Exultet” of Holy Saturday) the true light of our spiritual life.
The Syriac version and the version of Aquila derive the Hebrew noun helel from the verb yalal, “to lament”; St. Jerome agrees with them (In Isaiah 1:14), and makes Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel who must lament the loss of his original glory bright as the morning star. In Christian tradition this meaning of Lucifer has prevailed; the Fathers maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the devil, but denotes only the state from which he has fallen (Petavius, De Angelis, III, iii, 4).
Code:
([Hebrew](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07176a.htm) *helel*; [Septuagint](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13722a.htm) *heosphoros*, [Vulgate](http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15515b.htm) *lucifer*)The Syriac version and the version of Aquila derive the Hebrew noun helel from the verb yalal, “to lament”; St. Jerome agrees with them (In Isaiah 1:14), and makes Lucifer the name of the principal fallen angel who must lament the loss of his original glory bright as the morning star. In Christian tradition this meaning of Lucifer has prevailed; the Fathers maintain that Lucifer is not the proper name of the devil, but denotes only the state from which he has fallen (Petavius, De Angelis, III, iii, 4).
B
buffalo
Guest
Devil
…
In the Old Testament we have a brief reference to the Fall in Job 4:18: “In his angels he found wickedness”. But to this must be added the two classic texts in the prophets:
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, who didst rise in the morning? how art thou fallen to the earth, that didst wound the nations? And thou saidst in thy heart: I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, I will sit in the mountain of the covenant, in the sides of the north. I will ascend above the height of the clouds, I will be like themost High. But yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, into the depth of the pit. (Isaiah 14:12-15) This parable of the prophet is expressly directed against the King of Babylon, but both the early Fathers and later Catholic commentators agree in understanding it as applying with deeper significance to the fall of the rebel angel. And the older commentators generally consider that this interpretation is confirmed by the words of Our Lord to his disciples: “I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven” (Luke 10:18). For these words were regarded as a rebuke to the disciples, who were thus warned of the danger of pride by being reminded of the fall of Lucifer. But modern commentators take this text in a different sense, and refer it not to the original fall of Satan, but his overthrow by the faith of the disciples, who cast out devils in the name of their Master. And this new interpretation, as Schanz observes, is more in keeping with the context.
…
In the Old Testament we have a brief reference to the Fall in Job 4:18: “In his angels he found wickedness”. But to this must be added the two classic texts in the prophets:
How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, who didst rise in the morning? how art thou fallen to the earth, that didst wound the nations? And thou saidst in thy heart: I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God, I will sit in the mountain of the covenant, in the sides of the north. I will ascend above the height of the clouds, I will be like themost High. But yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, into the depth of the pit. (Isaiah 14:12-15) This parable of the prophet is expressly directed against the King of Babylon, but both the early Fathers and later Catholic commentators agree in understanding it as applying with deeper significance to the fall of the rebel angel. And the older commentators generally consider that this interpretation is confirmed by the words of Our Lord to his disciples: “I saw Satan like lightning falling from heaven” (Luke 10:18). For these words were regarded as a rebuke to the disciples, who were thus warned of the danger of pride by being reminded of the fall of Lucifer. But modern commentators take this text in a different sense, and refer it not to the original fall of Satan, but his overthrow by the faith of the disciples, who cast out devils in the name of their Master. And this new interpretation, as Schanz observes, is more in keeping with the context.
F
Fidelis
Guest
Boy, why do the “middle ages” always get blamed for stuff that non-Catholics don’t like?
As the quotes above by other posters show, the name “Lucifer” was applied to the devil as far back as the Early Church Fathers as, if not a proper name, at least a description.
G
Gottle_of_Geer
Guest
There’s a further complication 
- see Rev. 12
The advantage with the second interpretation of Luke 10.18 is that it underlines the Messianic & apocalyptic character of Jesus; the fall of satan is the fall of its kingdom as a result of the coming of the Kingship/Reign/Rule of God. Luke 10.16 would then refer to the exousia-authority of the Apostles as the heralds of the Kingship of God, which they have from Jesus Who has it from His Father.As for the “king of Babylon” it may refer to a human ruler; but it may perhaps be a reference to Marduk the patron god of Babylon; one of whose titles is Lugal Shuanna, “King of Babylon”.
T
texrec
Guest
Hmm. Well, it appears that the answer to my original question is that there is no straightforward description of how Satan came to be in scripture. I just finished reading an exposition on the devil in the Catholic Encyclopedia, and from this I conclude that the stories I heard as a youth about the fall of the angels and the appearance of Satan are largely conjecture based on obscure references in Scripture, the writings of the Latern Councils and many theological discussions. As I read the article I found myself struggling with numerous new questions until my head began to hurt!
Scripture is quite clear, however, about the existence of Satan - there is no argument about that.
Thank you for your responses…
Scripture is quite clear, however, about the existence of Satan - there is no argument about that.
Thank you for your responses…
C
ckempston
Guest
So to prove your point that Lucifer = Satan, you quote a Catholic encyclopedia which just re-affirms the fact with no evidence, other than claiming that Jerome believed it to be so, but the trail goes cold for some reason (more claims without proof). You do realize that simply repeating something doesn’t make it true, don’t you?
And while it may be a convenient fact that things non-Catholics don’t like often turned up in the Middle Ages, that doesn’t make it any less true.
It’s also really easy for people who take passages out of context to distort them as you have done in this case. Isaiah 14 continues:
Just keep reading Isaiah 14. You cannot reasonably claim that this is Satan unless you lift 3 verses out of the passage with no consideration whatsoever for context.
And while it may be a convenient fact that things non-Catholics don’t like often turned up in the Middle Ages, that doesn’t make it any less true.
It’s also really easy for people who take passages out of context to distort them as you have done in this case. Isaiah 14 continues:
Satan never laid low the nations, the king of Babylon did.
It doesn’t get much more obvious than calling “Lucifer” a man, which Satan is suredly not.
Just keep reading Isaiah 14. You cannot reasonably claim that this is Satan unless you lift 3 verses out of the passage with no consideration whatsoever for context.
N
Nutshell
Guest
Once on EWTN, I heard something like this…
God made Lucifer the smartest of all the angles. He then asked each angel who you love more yourself or Myself.
Satan and those like him answered themselves.
God made Lucifer the smartest of all the angles. He then asked each angel who you love more yourself or Myself.
Satan and those like him answered themselves.
S
Swan
Guest
The History Channel has a good program on the historical development of Satan and hell. They should this stuff a lot this time of year - you might want to check their website to see if it’s going to be on. It’s worth watching, IMO.
M
Mystic_Warrior
Guest
As others have posted…Lucifer is not Satan. Lucifer is only found ONCE in the entire Scripture in Isaiah 14. And, this is the King of Babylon. Satan is found many times and is a different being altogether. Satan is the adversary, the accuser of the brethren, whereas Lucifer was a “son of the morning star”. Lucifer is one of the crown princes of hell, under the tutelage of Satan, the fallen “ruler” of hell.
Peace…
MW
M
Mystic_Warrior
Guest
There is no clear picture of how Satan came into existence. But, it’s clear that he exists and his attributes are well documented in Scripture. The stories are mixed about Satan and Lucifer, so it’s hard to get it exactly right. From my personal experience of fighting evil, I have concluded that they are two different beings, with Lucifer being subject to Satan.
Peace…
MW
M
Mystic_Warrior
Guest
To the OP:
You might try asking Imryl, the resident diabolist of CAF what her take is on them. I’m sure she could provide a perspective straight from the horses mouth, so to speak.
Peace…
MW
You might try asking Imryl, the resident diabolist of CAF what her take is on them. I’m sure she could provide a perspective straight from the horses mouth, so to speak.
Peace…
MW
P
PoliSciProf
Guest
I have a vague memory from either school or something I read that the angels were given a vision of the incarnation and that the fallen angels’ sin was their refusal to worship Jesus Christ since he was also a material being. Did anyone else hear of this and can identify the source of this story?
S
spauline
Guest
yeah, heard this from a priest on EWTN, there is perhaps no Scriptural data for this, perhaps it comes from a Tradition or Private Revelation.
In addition, this seems hinted at by Christ to St. Faustina in her diary when, in response to St. Faustina’s Q about why the angels were not forgiven in their fall, Christ said, “because they knew so much.”
R
ryanoneil
Guest
I was just reading the book “Social-Science Commentary on the Letters of Paul” page 42.
Persian word: satan - the secret service of the Persian emperor who tempted and tested the loyalty of the emperor’s subjects
Peace,
Ryan
Persian word: satan - the secret service of the Persian emperor who tempted and tested the loyalty of the emperor’s subjects
Peace,
Ryan
M
MLindsay
Guest
In Genesis it says the devil fell to earth, but in John it said to hell. Where exactly does the devil “reside”, hell or earth?
Did God cast the devil into hell (or earth)?
Did God cast the devil into hell (or earth)?
- Status