Satan and his demons are real beings/entities (with personalities) not abstract evil within unregenerate man

[rwb]

Anyone of these

Luke 10:18

• “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.”
• Jesus affirms Satan’s dramatic fall, referencing the same cosmic event.

Revelation 12:7–9

• “Then war broke out in heaven. Michael and his angels fought against the dragon… The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil, or Satan.”
• This passage vividly describes Satan being cast out of heaven by the archangel Michael and his forces.

Job 1:6–7

• “Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them.”
• Satan appears in the heavenly court, speaking directly with God and accusing Job.

Where can we find this spirit called Satan before being cast out, was created an angel of God and then became Satan?

These verses show us the serpent, being Satan was evil from creation. So evil in fact that he was able to corrupt the mind of Eve and through that deception brought sin and death through sin into creation!

John 8:44 (KJV) Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

2 Corinthians 11:3 (KJV) But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

 

[Scott Downey]

Where can we find this spirit called Satan before being cast out, was created an angel of God and then became Satan?

These verses show us the serpent, being Satan was evil from creation. So evil in fact that he was able to corrupt the mind of Eve and through that deception brought sin and death through sin into creation!

John 8:44 (KJV) Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

2 Corinthians 11:3 (KJV) But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

From the beginning, Jesus is referring to the garden of Eden, IMO, after the creation of man, Satan turned evil. You have no proof Satan was not an angel of God. Whereas what does Job say

Bible Gateway passage: Job 38 - New King James Version

The Lord Reveals His Omnipotence to Job - Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said: “Who is this who darkens counsel By words without knowledge? Now prepare yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer Me. “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the...

www.biblegateway.com

Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said:

2 “Who is this who darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
3 Now [a]prepare yourself like a man;
I will question you, and you shall answer Me.

4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.
5 Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the [b]line upon it?
6 To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,

7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Here is being spoken of the angels as this was before any man had been created.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There is no contrast, they all receive the same fate.

This seems hopeless. You're not understanding my point. I did not say they do not all receive the same fate. I'm saying that the angels who sinned referenced in 2 Peter 2:4 are not the same as the ungodly of Noah's day referenced in verse 5 and a third group is mentioned in verse 6 (the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah). Let me know if you understand what I'm saying here or not. There's no point in continuing unless you see my point.

Eric, the MESSENGERS who sinned (sons of God), are ungodly humans who lived in the days when man began to call upon the name of the Lord, and the ungodly humans who lived in the days of Noah. God tells us the same fate awaits both ages.

You just are not getting it. No, Peter is not referencing the ungodly who lived in the days of Noah at all in 2 Peter 2:4. They are referenced only in verse 5. In 2 Peter 2 verses 4, 5 and 6 "the angels who sinned" referenced in verse 4 are differentiated from the ungodly of Noah's day referenced in verse 5 and both groups are differentiated from the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah referenced in verse 6. Do you see my point? I'm not asking if you agree. I'm just asking if you see my point now. I don't want us to keep wasting time making straw man arguments just because neither of us understand what the other is saying, so I'm trying to not only clarify my view, but get you to clarify yours as well.

The ungodly humans in the early days of creation, along with the ungodly humans in the days of Noah, as well as the ungodly humans who lived in Sodom and Gomorrah are cast down to hell and reserved for judgment. And every other human who is ungodly shall receive the same fate.

So, now you're trying to say that "the angels who sinned" include the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah and all ungodly humans? If so, that is not at all what Peter indicated. He differentiated between "the angels who sinned", the ungodly of Noah's day and the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah. So, "the angels who sinned", whether literal angels or human messengers, do not include the ungodly of Noah's day or of Sodom and Gomorroah.

None of this is speaking of angels of God being cast down to hell, its talking about ungodly HUMANS, who were initially called 'sons of God' but became ungodly by turning away from the righteousness of God and became evil. That's what Jude means when he writes the human messengers (not spirits) kept not their first estate but left their own habitation. Their first estate is the orderly, or beginning place being messengers of righteousness, their own habitation, is their residence in heaven. They disobeyed God and lusted after the world and became evil, so they are all condemned to suffer the lake of fire that is the second death.

2 Peter 2:4-6 (KJV) For if God spared not the angels (HUMAN MESSENGERS) that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment; And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly; And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;

Jude 6-7 (KJV) And the angels (HUMAN MESSENGERS) which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

Notice Jude 7 there. Just like 2 Peter 2:4-6, the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah are differentiated from "the angels who sinned" and "kept not their first estate", but you try to say that the angels include the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah.

I'm not interested in what you believe I might be saying! I'm waiting to hear you biblically refute it.

If I'm misunderstanding what you're saying, then how can I refute it? I can't refute something if I don't even know what it is. You need to be more clear. You don't give straightforward answers to straightforward questions half the time for some reason.

In the beginning when God created the heaven and earth, the darkness was there and God was there. Whether God created the darkness or not isn't the point.

It is a point related to the discussion because you are saying the darkness represents spiritual darkness, right? And we're talking about whether or not God created Satan and demons, who obviously are associated with spiritual darkness, to be evil. If He did then it could be said that He created evil. But, scripture says everything He created was very good (Genesis 1:31). You don't seem to want to talk about the FACT that God did create Satan and demons. In your view they were always evil. But, you are contradicting scripture by saying that because everything God created, which would have included the beings we now call Satan and demons, was very good.

You don't seem to understand that God is THE light!

LOL. So, when God said "Let there be light" He was saying "Let there be Me"? I'm not trying to be offensive by saying it that way. I'm trying to show you how what you're saying comes across. You're being very biased here. If God Himself is the light that was divided from the darkness then why in the world would God say "Let there be light" after which it says "and there was light"? He would not to say "Let there be light" if light already existed. That is talking about literal light that was divided from literal darkness because it is associated with day and night. You are completely missing the context of Genesis 1, which is concerning because of what that can lead to. And there are a number of people who deny that Genesis 1 is a literal account of God creating literal things. They say it's all myth and was just written to teach moral lessons. They deny that the first humans were Adam and Eve and all kinds of nonsense like that.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

He did not create Himself, because He has always existed.

Genesis 1:1-4 (KJV) In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

The darkness is to be without the Light of God, who is the Light of the world. The Light of God brings life and darkness brings death. God overcame the darkness by speaking Himself (His Light) into the darkness, that His creation, the world, would be filled with life through His Light. The life that God created in six days. God did not do away completely with the darkness but divided the darkness with His Light, calling the Light Day and the darkness Night.

John 1:1-5 (KJV) In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

John 1:9 (KJV) That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.

John 8:12 (KJV) Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

God, the Holy Spirit was there moving upon the waters, and God the Father was there saying "Let there be light." In the beginning God created heaven and earth, but this does not say that God created the light or darkness. He says only that He speaks and light shined into the darkness.

He said "Let there be light" and then there was light, so that very strongly implies that He created the light. I think you are making something very simple into something complicated for no good reason.

I believe the darkness is a metaphor for the kingdom of all evil and death,

If you start thinking that Genesis 1 is referring to metaphors then you can end up like those who deny that any part of Genesis 1 is literal. There is no indication in the text itself that the darkness is a metaphor. It is divided from the light to form the day and night. Do you not take the reference to the day and night literally, either?

and that when God spoke His Light into creation the demonic spirit came out of the darkness symbolized as a serpent, desiring to return all that God created back to darkness and death challenging God for the souls of mankind.

None of this is indicated in the text whatsoever.

Where might we find a text or verse saying invisible spirits (angels & demons) are created?

Are you saying that you don't believe angels and demons were created? How could they not have been created? Of course they were. Only God has always existed.

Are not they defined as a current of air, or breeze, Divine God, Christ's Spirit, the Holy Spirit, angel, demon?

What in the world are you talking about here? They are actual spirit beings that God created. What is hard to understand about that?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Good to hear from you again TS!

Yes, the light and darkness are literal.

LOL. Now you say this after telling me repeatedly that they are metaphorical? Did you change your mind?

Both symbolizing the True Light that brings life to the world, and also the darkness symbolizing death the seeks to overcome the True Light. The spiritual battle between the forces of Light and the forces of Darkness began from the beginning of creation and will not end until the last day of this age.

In Genesis 1, the references to the light and the darkness are just literal light and darkness and do not symbolize anything. Other scriptures do refer to spiritual light and darkness, but not Genesis 1. Did you somehow miss that TS said that as well? I don't think he agrees with your understanding of Genesis 1.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Regarding this passage from Hebrews, I posted: Exodus 20:11 (KJV) For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it.

To which you replied: "Of course. I didn't say otherwise. You seem to have a reading comprehension problem and are reading things that I'm not saying."

Now you act surprised that all that was created in heaven and earth was created in six days.

I am doing no such thing. I am not surprised by it at all. What in the world are you talking about? Your false accusations do nothing to help your case.

That includes angels of God He tells us they are ALL ministering spirits, sent to minister to heirs of salvation. But that proves that Satan was not created an angel of God who of his own free will decided to disobey God and became Satan.

It does not prove that. That statement tells what is true right now about angels and says nothing one way or another about whether or not Satan and demons are fallen angels.

So you twist and try to manipulate the passage by saying this: "Paul was speaking in the present tense there about the angels who were ministering spirits. He said at the time he was writing the angels ARE ministering spirits. He said nothing about whether any of them ever sinned in the past and fell away from God at any point. So, you can't use that passage to support your view. I should be laughing at you."

Hebrews 1:7 (KJV) And of the angels he saith, Who maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flame of fire.

Hebrews 1:13-14 (KJV) But to which of the angels said he at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?

And you wonder why I LOL!

Yes, I still wonder why. Your arguments are very weak but you have deluded yourself into thinking they are strong arguments. It says, in present tense, God's angels ARE all ministering spirits. It is not referring back to the creation of angels there. You are the one twisting the text to fit your belief. And, I'll tell you what's truly LOL worthy. You thinking that Satan and demons were always evil, which would mean God created them to be evil, despite scripture explicitly saying that everything God created was very good (Genesis 1:31). LOL! Now, THAT is funny.

Yes, and angelos is defined - a messenger; especially an "angel"; by implication, a pastor:—angel, messenger. (See John the Baptist for example)

No one is debating whether or not the word can refer to angels or to human messengers. Most often, it refers to angels.

The context of both 2 Peter and Jude refers to HUMAN MESSENGERS, not angels.

Wrong. When it speaks of humans, it gives specific details about them, such as the time they lived in (Noah's day) or their location (Sodom and Gomorrah). We see no such detail given about "the angels who sinned" because it's referring to angels and not humans.

Judgment falls on humans, and demonic spirits not the spirits of God. It's referring back to the sons of God, human messengers appointed to display the glory and righteousness of God unto all the earth. But failed in their task being drawn away through lusts of the flesh.

Why doesn't it give us that detail in the text then? In verse 5 it gives details about which humans are being referenced there. The ungodly who lived in the days of Noah. In verse 6 it gives details about which humans are being referenced there. The ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah. Verse 4 has no such details.

Yes, it obviously does mean exactly that! You need the angels of God to be fallen to cling to the myth of Satan being a fallen angel of God.

LOL. Everything God created, including the being we call Satan, was very good (Genesis 1:31). Obviously, Satan is not very good anymore. Therefore, he is fallen. Very simple.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Why was the serpent more cunning and crafty in a bad way then every other beast of the field?

You are twisting the text again. It does NOT say that the serpent is more cunning and crafty in a bad way than every other beast in the field. It says the serpent is more subtle than every other beast in the field. There is nothing bad about being subtle in and of itself. A literal serpent is subtle in how it goes about catching its prey and there is nothing bad about that. That's like saying it's bad for lions to sneak up on their prey. It's possible to be subtle in a good way or a bad way, but Satan is subtle in a bad way. Literal serpents are neither good nor evil. Satan is compared to a serpent, not because a serpent is evil, but because a serpent is subtle and takes its prey by surprise. There is nothing wrong with a serpent doing that, but Satan is subtle in an evil way because of being deceptive in a way that is not immediately obvious.

Can you not understand that God's plan from the foundation of the world was ordained that mankind would be deceived by the serpent, so they could experience good (life & light) and evil (death & darkness). Because good and evil cannot be created but must be experienced or it makes no sense that Christ is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

When did I say I don't understand this? Of course God was aware of what would happen when Adam and Eve were tempted. He knew they would not be able to resist temptation. You are correct that good and evil were not created, but you say that Satan and demons were evil from the beginning of creation, which would mean you believe they were created to be evil. Not only does that contradict the fact that everything God created was good, but you are contradicting yourself by saying that Satan and demons were always evil, but that evil wasn't created. That's like saying that the beings we now call Satan and demons weren't created, but, of course, they were created, because no beings can exist without God creating them. And, if we trust Genesis 1:31 to be true, then we have to assume that they were created very good since everything God created was very good.

God had an answer for the problem of sin and death before He created all things in heaven and earth. The serpent served God's purpose to test mankind that they would come to understand their need of the Savior. So, like the verse tells us "Everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good."

LOL. To be clear, you are talking about Satan here when you refer to "the serpent", right? And, it looks like you are acknowledging that Satan was made/created, right? But, now you are trying to tell me that Satan was made evil to test mankind and that was very good? I guess if that was what God actually did, you could say it was very good, but you couldn't say that Satan himself was created/made very good since he is evil. So, you are contradicting Genesis 1:31 with your belief no matter how you spin it.

Tell me this. If Satan, from the beginning of when he was made/created, has merely being doing what he was made to do, then why will he eventually be cast into the lake of fire to experience eternal torment (Revelation 20:10)? Why exactly is God's wrath against Satan if Satan is merely doing what God created him to do? That makes no sense. What makes much more sense is that Satan rebelled against God and he is going to be punished for his rebellion. God punishes rebellion. We see that over and over again in scripture. He never punishes anyone for no discernible reason.

More spinning the clear texts to support a doctrine built on myth, legend, and passed down through the generations by man of Old who had little understanding of the spirit realm. This is total nonsense! "we could say that, in a sense".....whatever

No one is spinning more clear texts in this thread than you are, so your comment here means nothing to me. I mean, you can't possibly spin the texts in Genesis 1:31 and 2 Peter 2:4 any worse than you are doing. Genesis 1:31 explicitly states that EVERYTHING God created was very good and here you are saying that Satan and demons were evil from the moment they were created. And 2 Peter 2:4 explicitly refers to the angels who sinned and you try to turn the angels into humans instead. You think you have more discernment than every English Bible translator and many other millions of Christians who disagree with your false interpretation of that verse.

The problem for you is that every time you see angelos translated angel, you automatically think it is an angel of God.

No, I do not. What do you think you accomplish with your false accusations? I'm going to start thinking you are a Premil if you keep that up because that's what I expect from them, not another Amil.

Search for yourself and you will find angelos is translated messenger as well as angel of God.

I already know that! Hello?! I never said otherwise. But, most of the time it is translated as angel and ALL of the English Bible translations that I've seen translate it as "angels" in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6.

For instance, speaking of John the Baptist the text calls him a messenger translated from angelos. It was obvious to the translators that John was not an angel, so they correctly translated messenger instead of angel. It is only the Literal Translations that accurately translate angelos throughout 'messenger', because that is how it should be translated according to the Greek Concordance. Then the student of the Word would be able to discern according to the context whether angelos is an invisible spirit (angel or demon), or a human being such as John the Baptist.

Once again, angels of God are not cast into hell to await judgment day. Only messengers of Satan and whosoever remains in unbelief shall be cast into hell to await the second death through the lake of fire.

You fail to see that 2 Peter 2:4 refers to angels being cast into Tartarus, which is not the same as where it talks about the spirits of unbelievers being in Hades. Why are you aware of the definitions of the word angelos while being seemingly unaware of the Greek word translated as "hell" in 2 Peter 2:4 which is different than the Greek word translated as hell in relation to where the souls of dead unbelievers go when they die (Luke 16:23)?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Are "angels" the "spirits" within the righteous and the wicked? Basically: are "demons" (or "evil angels") the spirits of the wicked? Are "elect angels" the spirits of the righteous?

When someone denies that the account of the man being possessed by many demons (evil spirits) actually occurred, as TS does, then you know he is liable to believe almost anything. There is no indication given whatsoever that the account of a man having many demons in him with Jesus casting them out into the swine who then ran off a cliff was not a literal event that happened. No indication whatsoever that it's just a made up story. Where does this end? With this kind of approach to scripture someone can eventually conclude that the entire Bible consists of nothing but made up stories. It's just ridiculous.

 

[TribulationSigns]

Here is being spoken of the angels as this was before any man had been created.

Of course not! :-)

From the beginning, Jesus is referring to the garden of Eden, IMO, after the creation of man, Satan turned evil. You have no proof Satan was not an angel of God.

I do. Just that you lack spiritual ears.

Whereas what does Job say

So you quoted Job, but the real question is do you understand the context? The passage seemed to follow a common parallel format found in the surrounding text. Look at the repetitious nature of the surrounding passages for my reasoning:

Job 38:5
(5) Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Note here the phrases "laid the measures thereof," and "stretched the line upon it," how they communicate the same thing.

Job 38:6
(6) Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

Again here in verse six, "foundations thereof fastened" and "laid the corner stone," communicating the same thing.

Job 38:7
(7) When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Following the pattern before, the morning stars and the sons of God would be the same item! Let continue...

Job 38:8
(8) Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?

Again, the sea is shut in, and it bursts out.

Job 38:9
(9) When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,

And once again, the clouds are a garment, and the thick darkness is a swaddling band. Again communicating the same thing.

Clearly from the text of the context that the sons of God "are" the morning stars.

See... Christ holds a similar title, "Son of God". Clearly the title "Son of God" is not exclusive to Jesus, else we would have a rather odd doctrine being taught throughout scripture. Son of God must also refer to God's children, the chosen Elect. Christ is called the "Son of God," while there are all Elect as the sons of God. All those who are sons of the Father are often times called the sons of God (Romans 8:14, 9:26, Galatians 3:26, etc.).

Likewise, Christ holds a similar title, although he is the "bright and morning star." Clearly the title "morning star" is not exclusive to Jesus, it also refers to others. We see throughout Scripture that God's children are called stars.

It's important to note here that titles shows direct connections with Christ. He "IS" Israel, and His followers are Israel. He is the son of God, His followers are the sons of God. He is the morning star, His followers are morning stars. It would then follow that these morning stars refer to God's people, the sons of God, and the morning stars... IN CHRIST! Not your vision of angels!

Selah!

Any more questions?

@rwb

 

[rwb]

From the beginning, Jesus is referring to the garden of Eden, IMO, after the creation of man, Satan turned evil. You have no proof Satan was not an angel of God.

At least you admit it is your opinion! Just saying after the creation of man, Satan turned evil does not prove he was created an angel of God and became Satan through freely choosing to disobey God!

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Where can we find this spirit called Satan before being cast out, was created an angel of God and then became Satan?

These verses show us the serpent, being Satan was evil from creation. So evil in fact that he was able to corrupt the mind of Eve and through that deception brought sin and death through sin into creation!

John 8:44 (KJV) Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

2 Corinthians 11:3 (KJV) But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

You continue to cherry pick scripture like I would expect a pre-trib to do.

It's not possible that Satan was evil from creation! You are blatantly contradicting this verse...

Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

This very explicitly says that EVERYTHING God created was very good. And we know that all beings, including Satan, were created by God. But, Satan is clearly NOT very good. Therefore, Satan had to have been created very good and then he later became evil by his own choice to rebel against God.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

More like no study of Scripture because the doctrine is inconsistent and contradictory at every turn. It's in total disharmony with everything else in the Bible. Look... the Serpent itself was cursed to symbolize the unclean spirit of man. That's why God told Israel they were forbidden to eat whatsoever goes about upon the belly (Leviticus 11:42) because that represented an unclean animal, signifying unsaved man. You need to look it up in Acts 10:14; Acts 10:28; etc.! When we become saved, God has cleansed what was once unclean in the Spirit of Christ.

@rwb Why did you love TS's post? I quoted part of it above. Do you just automatically like or love all of TS's posts regardless of whether you agree with what he says in them or not? You have said that you believe that Satan is a real, literal evil spirit being. Is that correct? TS does not believe that. Do you agree with what he said above? Do you think the reference to the serpent in Genesis 3 does not represent the real, literal evil spirit being named Satan rather than "the unclean spirit of man", as TS claims?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Operating in heaven? Show me the Scripture and we will talk. :-)



Have you even consider that it is man's own mind that corrupted that deceived himself per my post above? Geez!



Huh? No, Satan is a spirit. What spirit is this? Of course, its the spirit of man! His own spirit of disobedience! Go read my post carefully... and slowly.

@rwb Why did you love this post that TS made? He is claiming that Satan is "the spirit of man". Do you now agree with that? You have said before that you believe that Satan is a literal, evil spirit being. Have you changed your mind?

 

[rwb]

I'm saying that the angels who sinned referenced in 2 Peter 2:4 are not the same as the ungodly of Noah's day referenced in verse 5 and a third group is mentioned in verse 6 (the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah). Let me know if you understand what I'm saying here or not. There's no point in continuing unless you see my point.

And I'm telling you 2 Pe 2:4 does not depict fallen angels of God as the ungodly in the days of Noah. The literal translation if angelos had been correctly translated, we see it is speaking about human messengers and not fallen angels of God. In the days of Seth these human messengers (sons of God) began to call upon the name of God. But instead of remaining righteous as Noah was, these sons of God, messengers preaching in the name of the Lord, lusted after the things of the world, and through them the whole earth became polluted through sin.

Genesis 4:26 (YLT) And to Seth, to him also a son hath been born, and he calleth his name Enos; then a beginning was made of preaching in the name of Jehovah.

2 Peter 2:4 (YLT) For if God messengers who sinned did not spare, but with chains of thick gloom, having cast them down to Tartarus, did deliver them to judgment, having been reserved,

Jude 6-7 (YLT) messengers also, those who did not keep their own principality, but did leave their proper dwelling, to a judgment of a great day, in bonds everlasting, under darkness He hath kept, as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them, in like manner to these, having given themselves to whoredom, and gone after other flesh, have been set before--an example, of fire age-during, justice suffering.

Eric, none of these verses say that angels of God committed sin and are therefore cast down to Tartarus to be reserved for Judgment Day! These verses speak of human messengers, those called sons of God who rejected their principal calling to preach in the name of the Lord, turning away from their dwelling place (habitation) with God and became one with evil through the influence of Satan. Those of Sodom and Gomorrah gave themselves to whoredom, served detestable gods committing spiritual adultery going after strange flesh, by intermingling righteous blood with the blood of unrighteousness, those in unbelief. The messengers of Noah's day are compared to unholy humans of Sodom and Gomorrah. Why would God compare them with humans of Sodom and Gomorrah if he was speaking of angels of God who sinned?

 

[rwb]

He said "Let there be light" and then there was light, so that very strongly implies that He created the light. I think you are making something very simple into something complicated for no good reason.

God does not say let me create light! He says let there be light that already existed. He is the Light that gives light to the whole world, and at the moment He spoke the world in utter darkness became lighted by His glory. He spoke these words before He created the sun, moon and stars. What was the Light if not the Light and glory of God?

What in the world are you talking about here? They are actual spirit beings that God created. What is hard to understand about that?

Define "actual spirit beings" Eric???

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

And I'm telling you 2 Pe 2:4 does not depict fallen angels of God as the ungodly in the days of Noah.

Are you even reading what I'm saying carefully at all? You're not addressing what I said. Why do you try to relate 2 Peter 2:4 to the ungodly of Noah's day when they are not referenced in verse 4, but rather in verse 5? As I've told you several times now, Peter refers to three different groups within 2 Peter 2:4-6. 1) The angels who sinned (verse 4). 2) The ungodly of Noah's day (verse 5). 3) The ungodly of the ancient cities of Sodom and Gomorrah (verse 6). Regardless of who you think the angels who sinned are, can you address what I'm saying here about different groups being referenced in each verse within 2 Peter 2:4-6?

I'm trying to establish that "the angels who sinned", regardless of who they are, do not include the ungodly of the days of Noah. And they do not include the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah. So, who are they? Unlike verses 5 and 6 where Peter gives details to identify who exactly he is talking about, we see no such thing in verse 4. It doesn't tell us in what time period they lived or where they were located like it does in verses 5 and 6 in relation to the ungodly of Noah's day and the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah. Why do you think that is? I believe it's because it's not referring to humans who lived during a certain time period and/or in a certain location, but rather is referring to angels who rebelled against God.

The literal translation if angelos had been correctly translated, we see it is speaking about human messengers and not fallen angels of God.

It is correctly translated. You are forced to believe that all (or at least a vast majority) of the English Bible translators got it wrong.

In the days of Seth these human messengers (sons of God) began to call upon the name of God. But instead of remaining righteous as Noah was, these sons of God, messengers preaching in the name of the Lord, lusted after the things of the world, and through them the whole earth became polluted through sin.

Genesis 4:26 (YLT) And to Seth, to him also a son hath been born, and he calleth his name Enos; then a beginning was made of preaching in the name of Jehovah.

2 Peter 2:4 (YLT) For if God messengers who sinned did not spare, but with chains of thick gloom, having cast them down to Tartarus, did deliver them to judgment, having been reserved,

Jude 6-7 (YLT) messengers also, those who did not keep their own principality, but did leave their proper dwelling, to a judgment of a great day, in bonds everlasting, under darkness He hath kept, as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them, in like manner to these, having given themselves to whoredom, and gone after other flesh, have been set before--an example, of fire age-during, justice suffering.

Eric, none of these verses say that angels of God committed sin and are therefore cast down to Tartarus to be reserved for Judgment Day!

Yes, they do. You just lack the discernment to see it. You blatantly contradict Genesis 1:31, which says that EVERYTHING God created was very good, by saying that He created Satan and demons to be evil. No, they were created very good since EVERYTHING God created was very good, and they rebelled against God.

These verses speak of human messengers,

What human messengers exactly? Be as specific as possible and don't try to include the ungodly of the days of Noah or the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah because Peter clearly differentiated between "the angels who sinned" and the ungodly of Noah's day and of Sodom and Gomorrah.

those called sons of God who rejected their principal calling to preach in the name of the Lord, turning away from their dwelling place (habitation) with God and became one with evil through the influence of Satan.

Who are they exactly? Be specific. And tell me why no identifying details are given about them like they are in relation to the ungodly of Noah's day and the ungodly of Sodom and Gomorrah. Why are we left to guess as to who "the angels who sinned" are if they were human beings?

Those of Sodom and Gomorrah gave themselves to whoredom, served detestable gods committing spiritual adultery going after strange flesh, by intermingling righteous blood with the blood of unrighteousness, those in unbelief. The messengers of Noah's day are compared to unholy humans of Sodom and Gomorrah. Why would God compare them with humans of Sodom and Gomorrah if he was speaking of angels of God who sinned?

For crying out loud, rwb. You continue to try to relate 2 Peter 2:4 to the ungodly of Noah's day when Peter differentiates "the angels who sinned" from the ungodly of Noah's day? In 2 Peter 2:4-6 Peter gives 3 DIFFERENT examples of groups who were punished by God and will be judged by God. You keep trying to act as if 2 Peter 2:4 relates to the ungodly of Noah's day, but that is absolutely not the case. They are only referenced in 2 Peter 2:5.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

God does not say let me create light! He says let there be light that already existed.

You are butchering the text just because of doctrinal bias. Just like pre-tribs do repeatedly. Do you want to be like them? If the light already existed He would not say "Let there be light" with that being followed by the statement "and then there was light". It would not say "and then there was light" if light already existed before that. That makes no sense whatsoever. It's clearly talking about Him creating light there. When TS said in his post that it's talking about literal light and darkness there, you agreed with him. Can you not make up your mind? Literal light did not exist before God created it. That's like saying the sun already existed before He created it.

Look at the text carefully and objectively.

Genesis 1:3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.

This is very clearly referring to literal light. TS even said so. And you agreed. But, here, you are disagreeing. You can't seem to make up your mind about what you believe. The fact that the light and darkness here are related directly to day and night should make it obvious that it's talking about literal light and darkness here. So, make up your mind already. Do you think that Genesis 1:3-5 is talking about literal light and darkness in terms of the light we see in the day time and the darkness that occurs at night or do you think it's talking about metaphorical light and darkness?

Define "actual spirit beings" Eric???

LOL. Real, literal spirit beings. Do you believe that God created real, literal spirit beings that we call Satan and demons?

 

[rwb]

LOL. Now you say this after telling me repeatedly that they are metaphorical? Did you change your mind?

Don't you know that a metaphor is used in relation to literal things? I hadn't realized you needed to have this explained to you.

In Genesis 1, the references to the light and the darkness are just literal light and darkness and do not symbolize anything. Other scriptures do refer to spiritual light and darkness, but not Genesis 1. Did you somehow miss that TS said that as well? I don't think he agrees with your understanding of Genesis 1.

For example, one of the most famous metaphors in literature is featured in this line from William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet: What light through yonder window breaks? It is the East, and Juliet, the sun! In this metaphor, Juliet is compared to the sun. In fact, this figure of speech claims that Juliet is the sun. Of course, the reader understands that Romeo does not believe that Juliet is literally the sun. Instead, the comparison demonstrates the idea that Romeo equates Juliet with the beauty, awe, and life-giving force of the sun. To Romeo, symbolically, Juliet and the sun are the same.

Yes, I've become abundantly aware that you lack spiritual understanding, so you must force Scripture to fit your literal understanding. Spiritual things must be spiritually discerned. We have the Spirit of Christ in us, through Him who instructs us, we have the mind of Christ. NOT LITERALLY of course (fyi), but spiritually.

1 Corinthians 2:12-16 (KJV) Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

It does not prove that. That statement tells what is true right now about angels and says nothing one way or another about whether or not Satan and demons are fallen angels.

NO! That's what you are trying to force the verse to say. Your fight is with the Word of God, you can twist and bend it to your heart's desire, but that does not take away the FACT that ALL the angels of God are ministering spirits sent to minister to heirs of salvation. Not just some of them but ALL of them!

 

[Scott Downey]

Of course not! :-)



I do. Just that you lack spiritual ears.



So you quoted Job, but the real question is do you understand the context? The passage seemed to follow a common parallel format found in the surrounding text. Look at the repetitious nature of the surrounding passages for my reasoning:

Job 38:5
(5) Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Note here the phrases "laid the measures thereof," and "stretched the line upon it," how they communicate the same thing.

Job 38:6
(6) Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

Again here in verse six, "foundations thereof fastened" and "laid the corner stone," communicating the same thing.

Job 38:7
(7) When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

Following the pattern before, the morning stars and the sons of God would be the same item! Let continue...

Job 38:8
(8) Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?

Again, the sea is shut in, and it bursts out.

Job 38:9
(9) When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,

And once again, the clouds are a garment, and the thick darkness is a swaddling band. Again communicating the same thing.

Clearly from the text of the context that the sons of God "are" the morning stars.

See... Christ holds a similar title, "Son of God". Clearly the title "Son of God" is not exclusive to Jesus, else we would have a rather odd doctrine being taught throughout scripture. Son of God must also refer to God's children, the chosen Elect. Christ is called the "Son of God," while there are all Elect as the sons of God. All those who are sons of the Father are often times called the sons of God (Romans 8:14, 9:26, Galatians 3:26, etc.).

Likewise, Christ holds a similar title, although he is the "bright and morning star." Clearly the title "morning star" is not exclusive to Jesus, it also refers to others. We see throughout Scripture that God's children are called stars.

It's important to note here that titles shows direct connections with Christ. He "IS" Israel, and His followers are Israel. He is the son of God, His followers are the sons of God. He is the morning star, His followers are morning stars. It would then follow that these morning stars refer to God's people, the sons of God, and the morning stars... IN CHRIST! Not your vision of angels!

Selah!

Any more questions?

@rwb

This in Job 38 is about the creation of the earth.

4 “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding.

5 Who determined its measurements?
Surely you know!
Or who stretched the [b]line upon it?

6 To what were its foundations fastened?
Or who laid its cornerstone,

7 When the morning stars sang together,
And all the sons of God shouted for joy?

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

Don't you know that a metaphor is used in relation to literal things? I hadn't realized you needed to have this explained to you.

LOL. You are hilarious! We're talking about the light and darkness referenced in Genesis 1:3-5. So, what are you saying, that you think it's referring to literal light and darkness in a metaphorical way there? If so, that is ridiculous! The light and darkness referenced there are referenced in the context of day and night and evening and morning. Clearly, it's referring to literal light and darkness in a literal way there and not in a metaphorical way.

Yes, I've become abundantly aware that you lack spiritual understanding

LOL! Oh, really? Should I go back and count how many times you've liked my posts related to the Amil vs. Premil debate? It would take me awhile to do so. How do you suppose that could be the case if I lack spiritual understanding, eh?

, so you must force Scripture to fit your literal understanding.

LOL. You are acting just like those who act as if spiritual discernment equates to spiritualizing scripture rather than relating to being able to spiriutally discern the difference between figurative and literal text. I don't force scripture to do anything. When it's literal, I interpret it accordingly and when it's not, I interpret it accordingly.

Spiritual things must be spiritually discerned.

There it is! You think spiritual discernment only relates to spiritual things. No! It relates to spiritually discerning the difference between literal and non-literal text or between spiritual and physical things. So, literal things or physical things must be spiritually discerned, also.

We have the Spirit of Christ in us, through Him who instructs us, we have the mind of Christ. NOT LITERALLY of course (fyi), but spiritually.

1 Corinthians 2:12-16 (KJV) Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.

The mind of Christ does not tell us to spiritualize literal text as you are doing and as TS often does and as Premils so often do.

NO! That's what you are trying to force the verse to say. Your fight is with the Word of God,

Stop this foolishness! Humble yourself and stop equating your INTERPRETATIONS of the Word of God with the Word of God itself.

you can twist and bend it to your heart's desire,

Says the guy who changes angels to humans and says that Satan and demons were created evil despite the fact that everything God created was very good (Genesis 1:31).

but that does not take away the FACT that ALL the angels of God are ministering spirits sent to minister to heirs of salvation. Not just some of them but ALL of them!

Yes, all of His angels ARE ministering spirits! I completely agree! But, that does not mean all the angels of God from the beginning of when He created the angels never rebelled against God. The verses that talk about angels of God being ministering spirits say nothing one way or another about whether or not some angels rebelled against God long ago.