Was Satan evil in Job 1:7?

[face2face]

I don’t look at ChristianIty that way. The truth is we are all mindless puppets in one way or other. We are all sinners and we fall short of the glory of God.

Just don't be a willing one!

15 Look down from thy holy habitation, from heaven, and bless thy people Israel, and the land which thou hast given us, as thou swarest unto our fathers.

This verse calls heaven the holy habitation

Why quote Deut 26:15?

Back to Isaiah 14

You implied the MORNING STAR Translated "Lucifer" is your Rebel Angel but this passage is about the king of Babylon (verse 4), a "man" ( in Verse 18).

You understand the symbolism right?

מָעוֹן
Part of Speech: Noun Masculine
Transliteration: maon or main
Phonetic Spelling: (maw-ohn')
Definition: dwelling, habitation

Nothing here of any value to Isaiah 14.

 

[face2face]

This tells me Satan fell after the creation week, not before it, since God created Satan.

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. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

All unfounded speculation - you dont have an origin story because its all false! every single little made up detail is a fabrication of the text.

People flounder and group in the mud trying to prove this being exists and they always fail miserably.

F2F

 

[Truthnightmare]

This tells me Satan fell after the creation week, not before it, since God created Satan.

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. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

I agree, that everything God created was good from day one to day six
But the “tree of knowledge of good and evil” was not good, and we must decide when was that created.

 

[Truthnightmare]

Just don't be a willing one!


Why quote Deut 26:15?

Back to Isaiah 14

You implied the MORNING STAR Translated "Lucifer" is your Rebel Angel but this passage is about the king of Babylon (verse 4), a "man" ( in Verse 18).

You understand the symbolism right?


Nothing here of any value to Isaiah 14.

Just don't be a willing one!


Why quote Deut 26:15?

Back to Isaiah 14

You implied the MORNING STAR Translated "Lucifer" is your Rebel Angel but this passage is about the king of Babylon (verse 4), a "man" ( in Verse 18).

You understand the symbolism right?


Nothing here of any value to Isaiah 14.

I quoted Deut because,
16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Isaiah 14 is only a fragment of information gathered to support my posistion.

The Hebrew word rendered "serpent" in Gen. 3:1 is Nachash (from the root Nachash, to shine), and means a shining one. Hence, in Chaldee it means brass or copper, because of its shining. Hence also, the word Nehushtan, a piece of brass, in 2Kings 18:4. In the same way Saraph, in Isa. 6:2, 6, means a burning one, and, because the serpents mentioned in Num. 21 were burning, in the poison of their bite, they were called Saraphim, or Saraphs. ~ EW Bullinger

The fall of Lucifer is mentioned in other places besides Isaiah, why not look at all the evidence?

 

[TonyChanYT]

Interesting, are you suggesting that he was already satan before the fall?

He was the satan [lowercase] in the Book of Job.

 

[TonyChanYT]

Indeed… But even if one uses the “shining one” that can still be a reference to satan.

I see much evidence of the shining one, Lucifer and satan being the same entity.

What is the difference between satan and Satan?

 

[face2face]

I quoted Deut because,
16] All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Deut 16 has its own context - nothing to do with the King of Babylon.

Isaiah 14 is only a fragment of information gathered to support my posistion.

Yes only a fragment which has not context at all.

Isaiah 14 is all about the King of Babylon...you know that right?

The Hebrew word rendered "serpent" in Gen. 3:1 is Nachash (from the root Nachash, to shine), and means a shining one. Hence, in Chaldee it means brass or copper, because of its shining. Hence also, the word Nehushtan, a piece of brass, in 2Kings 18:4. In the same way Saraph, in Isa. 6:2, 6, means a burning one, and, because the serpents mentioned in Num. 21 were burning, in the poison of their bite, they were called Saraphim, or Saraphs. ~ EW Bullinger

The fall of Lucifer is mentioned in other places besides Isaiah, why not look at all the evidence?

Fire away but I'm letting you know there is only disappointment for you at the end of this road.

I'll keep a record if you dont mind.

1. You misquoted Isaiah 14 to show the King of Babylon for some rebel angel
2. You tried to provide context from Deut 16 which was unsuccessful. The King fell from his lofty heights i.e. Heaven!

What's next?

 

[face2face]

What is the difference between satan and Satan?

Means Adversary.

It's a word that can be good or bad, depending on the context.

F2F

 

[Truthnightmare]

He was the satan [lowercase] in the Book of Job.

Who do you believe he was in the book of Genesis?

He was the satan [lowercase] in the Book of Job.

In my opinion, merely preference.

Deut 16 has its own context - nothing to do with the King of Babylon.

Yes only a fragment which has not context at all.

Isaiah 14 is all about the King of Babylon...you know that right?

Fire away but I'm letting you know there is only disappointment for you at the end of this road.

I'll keep a record if you dont mind.

1. You misquoted Isaiah 14 to show the King of Babylon for some rebel angel
2. You tried to provide context from Deut 16 which was unsuccessful. The King fell from his lofty heights i.e. Heaven!

What's next?

We are of given description, symbols, types and shadows.

For instance:
Ezekiel 31
31 And it came to pass in the eleventh year, in the third month, in the first day of the month, that the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,

2 Son of man, speak unto Pharaoh king of Egypt, and to his multitude; Whom art thou like in thy greatness?

3 Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs.

So because you see the word “Assyrian” you believe we are speaking about a king or a ruler of Assyria.

But if we continue reading we see…

9 I have made him fair by the multitude of his branches: so that all the trees of Eden, that were in the garden of God, envied him.

There was no Assyrian king or leader walking around in the garden of Eden.

This is why even in Isaiah 14 we see…

25 That I will break the Assyrian in my land, and upon my mountains tread him under foot: then shall his yoke depart from off them, and his burden depart from off their shoulders.

 

[face2face]

There was no Assyrian king or leader walking around in the garden of Eden.

This is why even in Isaiah 14 we see…

25 That I will break the Assyrian in my land, and upon my mountains tread him under foot: then shall his yoke depart from off them, and his burden depart from off their shoulders.

What is the figurative language used in Ezek 28 that describes the blessings the King of Tyre enjoyed.

List them here:

1.
2.
3.
4.

28:11 The word of the Lord came to me: 28:12 “Son of man, sing a lament for the king of Tyre, and say to him, ‘This is what the sovereign Lord says: Eze 28:11–12.

Once you have listed at least four we can discuss their meaning.

F2F

 

[Truthnightmare]

What is the figurative language used in Ezek 28 that describes the blessings the King of Type enjoyed.

List them here:

1.
2.
3.
4.

28:11 The word of the Lord came to me: 28:12 “Son of man, sing a lament for the king of Tyre, and say to him, ‘This is what the sovereign Lord says: Eze 28:11–12.

Once you have listed at least four we can discuss their meaning.

F2F

 

[face2face]

I get it @Truthnightmare you're not alone.

 

[face2face]

So many people believe in this doctrine but when you push for evidence they all find it's impossible to prove. The OT is totally silent on the existence of such a being while the use of the words "adversary" and "false accuser" are scattered throughout the record with varying context and meaning none of which paints the picture of a demonic being holding a pitch fork.

Christians can be so gullible.

F2F

 

[marks]

This tells me Satan fell after the creation week, not before it, since God created Satan.

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. Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them. And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

Yes, I agree with you. Everything was good, and God rested.

My own thoughts on this . . . I think the one we call Satan now was a fifth living creature around God's throne, who realized that it was the weak little mud people, not the glorious and powerful angels, who were at the heart of God's creation, and God's Own heart. And he was envious, Not them! Me!! I will be like God!!! I will sit in His counsel!! Not them!! My speculations.

A lion, the pinnacle of wild animals. The calf, domestic, the eagle, the birds. Man, the chief of God's creation. Was there also the dragon, the pinnacle of the reptiles? Is this why creeping things are unclean?

I think angels have the capacity to take on a form in which to enter this world, and so he took the form of the ancient serpent, in his mission to disqualify Man from the family of God. Except that man was given a promise of rescue, and it's been war ever since.

Much love!

 

[marks]

I agree, that everything God created was good from day one to day six
But the “tree of knowledge of good and evil” was not good, and we must decide when was that created.

But it WAS good. It's entirely possible that the time would have come when God would have permitted man to eat of the tree. Again, just my speculation, but here it is . . .

Why hadn't man eaten yet from the Tree of Life? Why hadn't he eaten that first? It was permitted, and was the Tree of Life, one of the two special trees. My guess, why that would be, is that the Tree of Life had not yet produced fruit.

And I wonder, if perhaps they had not eaten from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, that fruit would have then formed on the Tree of Life. And had they not eaten from the forbidden tree, this would have shown the stability of Innocent Righteousness, and they could have eaten from the Tree of Life, becoming immortal in Innocent Righteousness.

And it may be that then they could have received the knowledge of good and evil without it corrrupting them, I don't know.

Or it may be that tree would remain ever uneaten.

The thing is, though, I don't think Innocent Righteousness is a stable state. God is good in and of Himself, that is, He is intrinsically good. Man was created good, his goodness imparted to him by God. But man was not intrinsically good. And therefore what man had received man could lose. And lose it he did! Boy oh boy did he!!

Like I said, just some thoughts on these things . . .

To add another . . . the difference between we who are in Christ, and Adam before he fell, is that his spirit was alive and in fellowship with God being created good, and being innocent, and therefore having remained good, righteous. We, however, having been born with our spirit dead, are now spiritually alive and in fellowship with God because we've joined to Jesus' life, His righteousness and fellowship with the Father.

Much love!

 

[Truthnightmare]

What is the figurative language used in Ezek 28 that describes the blessings the King of Tyre enjoyed.

List them here:

1.
2.
3.
4.

28:11 The word of the Lord came to me: 28:12 “Son of man, sing a lament for the king of Tyre, and say to him, ‘This is what the sovereign Lord says: Eze 28:11–12.

Once you have listed at least four we can discuss their meaning.

F2F

That’s the problem, the king is only a symbol and a type.

Ezekiel 28:12 "Son 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."

The King of Tyrus was never perfect t, full of wisdom, and beauty. No man as ever had these attributes.

Ezekiel 28:13 "Thou hast been in Eden the Garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the Sardis, 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 thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created."

No King of Tyrus was never in Eden

Ezekiel 28:14 "Thou 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."

A cherub is higher than even a arch angel,
no King of Tyrus was ever a cherub.


.

But it WAS good. It's entirely possible that the time would have come when God would have permitted man to eat of the tree. Again, just my speculation, but here it is . . .

Why hadn't man eaten yet from the Tree of Life? Why hadn't he eaten that first? It was permitted, and was the Tree of Life, one of the two special trees. My guess, why that would be, is that the Tree of Life had not yet produced fruit.

And I wonder, if perhaps they had not eaten from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, that fruit would have then formed on the Tree of Life. And had they not eaten from the forbidden tree, this would have shown the stability of Innocent Righteousness, and they could have eaten from the Tree of Life, becoming immortal in Innocent Righteousness.

And it may be that then they could have received the knowledge of good and evil without it corrrupting them, I don't know.

Or it may be that tree would remain ever uneaten.

The thing is, though, I don't think Innocent Righteousness is a stable state. God is good in and of Himself, that is, He is intrinsically good. Man was created good, his goodness imparted to him by God. But man was not intrinsically good. And therefore what man had received man could lose. And lose it he did! Boy oh boy did he!!

Like I said, just some thoughts on these things . . .

To add another . . . the difference between we who are in Christ, and Adam before he fell, is that his spirit was alive and in fellowship with God being created good, and being innocent, and therefore having remained good, righteous. We, however, having been born with our spirit dead, are now spiritually alive and in fellowship with God because we've joined to Jesus' life, His righteousness and fellowship with the Father.

Much love!

What or who do you believe “the tree of life” is?
I believe the “tree of life” is Christ, which may add a different aspect to investigations of truth.

 

[Truthnightmare]

So many people believe in this doctrine but when you push for evidence they all find it's impossible to prove. The OT is totally silent on the existence of such a being while the use of the words "adversary" and "false accuser" are scattered throughout the record with varying context and meaning none of which paints the picture of a demonic being holding a pitch fork.

Christians can be so gullible.

F2F

The Bible speaks of a devil, isn't that a supernatural being?

 

[face2face]

That’s the problem, the king is only a symbol and a type.

No the King is real! That's the point of the prophecy - its about events that actually happened - I'm not sure what you are trying to prove here?

Ezekiel 28:12 "Son 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."

The King of Tyrus was never perfect t, full of wisdom, and beauty. No man as ever had these attributes.

Ah I see your mistake - it's said in the same vain as Job being perfect and righteous (Job 1:1) - I wont explain it out right now, i'd prefer you to think about it some more.

Ezekiel 28:13 "Thou hast been in Eden the Garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the Sardis, 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 thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created."

No King of Tyrus was never in Eden

So how is the figure being used?

Ezekiel 28:14 "Thou 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."

A cherub is higher than even a arch angel,
no King of Tyrus was ever a cherub.

Excellent, how is the figure being used?

This is Bible study Truth, you either want to enter the Word and learn or you force your own truth on it.

List the figures of speech being used

1. Garden of Eden
2. Guarding Cherub
3.
4.

Can you find more?

.

What or who do you believe “the tree of life” is?
I believe the “tree of life” is Christ, which may add a different aspect to investigations of truth.

I agree with you on the tree's significance!

F2F

 

[face2face]

The Bible speaks of a devil, isn't that a supernatural being?

It's just a word.

Here Jesus used the word to describe the actions of Judas:

1. John 6:70 Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil (false accuser or slander)!

So a couple of issues here for you to think about.

a. If Judas is an actual fallen rebel angel why would Jesus choose him as a disciple?
b. If Judas is a powerful evil immortal creature why would he hang himself? How can he die?
c. If Judas is a powerful evil immortal creature why would he not have attacked Jesus?

The truth is this - Judas was about to betray Jesus by slandering him before others and he paid the price for doing so with his life.

Do you require more examples?

Let me know - I've studied this subject for over 30 years.

F2F

 

[Truthnightmare]

No the King is real! That's the point of the prophecy - its about events that actually happened - I'm not sure what you are trying to prove here?



Ah I see your mistake - it's said in the same vain as Job being perfect and righteous (Job 1:1) - I wont explain it out right now, i'd prefer you to think about it some more.


So how is the figure being used?


Excellent, how is the figure being used?

This is Bible study Truth, you either want to enter the Word and learn or you force your own truth on it.

List the figures of speech being used

1. Garden of Eden
2. Guarding Cherub
3.
4.

Can you find more?

I agree with you on the tree's significance!

F2F

Much of what we believe comes down to how we interpret words.

Job 1:1 says Job was, תָּם (complete)
Ezekiel 28 says the king was כָּלִיל (perfect)

There is a difference here.