The Devil

  • Thread starter Thread starter Barel_Roll
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Barel_Roll

Guest
How did we come up with the current Christian (it is kind of even across the board) vision of Satan? As in the fallen angel Lucifer.

I know those of Jewish faith say Satan, or rather the satan (lower case, not proper noun), is an angel with the divine purpose of tempting the faithful, taking orders from god (my reference to this is Job, where God tells the devil to test him but not kill him - paraphrased 🙂 )

How did we go from that, to what Christians believe today?

I hope this is the correct forum
 
I would not even say that the two views are so different. The devil is still a temptor as the Gospels speak about.

I mean that if God was to tell him to do something Lucifer would still do it. He can’t disobey, unless God allows it.

I believe that the part of him being originally an angel and falling from heaven would have come from the apocalypse which tells of “a great star in heaven falling with 1/3 of the stars with him”. It is explained, but in the language of the apocalypse which isn’t always the most clear.

~RSF
 
Lucifer comes from the Latin, St. Jerome used it when he translated the Hebrew text of Isaiah 14:12-17.

As for Satan as a fallen angel and the teaching we have of him now, that is the description we get from the NT and the Lord Jesus Himself.
 
RedSoxFan said:
I mean that if God was to tell him to do something Lucifer would still do it. He can’t disobey, unless God allows it.

~RSF
Click to expand...
He can refuse, he can disobey, why do you think he is like what he is right now? God gives all free-will. Lucifer will do things if God asked him to if he feel it may benefit him. Take note with the issue with Jacob “test him”, isn’t that what Satan generally does day-in and day-out?
 
“How did we come up with the current Christian (it is kind of even across the board) vision of Satan? As in the fallen angel Lucifer.”

It’s a great metaphor for life itself. In order to be truly evil, one must know what he’s rebelling against, which is, the goodness of God. Therefore, Lucifer *had to be *a rebellious angel – someone who knew better, but acted on his free will to the contrary.
 
Clearly, from the Old Testament, the satan is a kind of angel, whose role is the opponent of man, or the accuser. Later development, especially as related by Jesus and the New Testament writers, indicated that this angel is evil, and is destined for eternal punishment. Since all God created is good, the only reasonable explanation is that this particular angel turned away from God, but is nevertheless inferior to him and is unable to do anything without God’s consent.

The 1/3 of the angels thing, however, is an interpretation by accommodation. The attachment of the name “Lucifer”, is even more recent, dating back to medieval times and comes to us from the Vulgate. But even the Isaiah 14:12 interpretation is also by accommodation, as the verse does not refer to the devil at all. I’m not inclined to attach the traditional “Lucifer”, which is a rather honorable name, to this creature. I think Satan is the only appropriate name.
 
RedSoxFan said:
. .
I believe that the part of him being originally an angel and falling from heaven would have come from the apocalypse which tells of “a great star in heaven falling with 1/3 of the stars with him”. It is explained, but in the language of the apocalypse which isn’t always the most clear.

~RSF
Click to expand...
See also
And he said to them, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.
Click to expand...
Luke 10:18
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top