-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How did Satan get to the garden of Eden?
- Thread starter jubilee131
- Start date
sincerly
Well-Known Member
False
A statement without Scriptural back-up is negated. Your personal opinion is without foundation.
You posted a site! I posted the same site showing the conclusion to be still needing definitive work which Human beings can not supply.
No! Jesus was never the off-spring of Joseph---as the Scriptures verify. The Apostles verified the truth. Matt.14:33, "Then they that were in the ship came and worshipped him, saying, Of a truth thou art the Son of God.
"
The Father acknowledged the fact, Matt.17:5, "While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him."
And just as impressive was the "unclean spirits" which were cast out of heaven, Mark 3:11, "And unclean spirits, when they saw him, fell down before him, and cried, saying, Thou art the Son of God".
It was the chief of those "unclean spirits"/Satan who presented himself as that serpent in the garden. Where had he come from?-----Heaven from whence he and the deceived angels were "casted out".
sincerly
Well-Known Member
It has been your post which are void of scriptural back-up.
There is no forcing of a literal interpretation since the Creator GOD explained the way the creation was made by HIM.
It wasn't metaphorically(a myth) told since the one's involved were the one' s who were Created. Adam was envolved with the "naming" since to the human race "dominion" was given to care for all that was Created.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
You did say the serpent represented knowledge....
Wisdom and knowledge are not the same thing.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Outhouse, "knowledge" is a collection of information. It alone can be fact or fiction.
"Wisdom" is in the discerning between the fact/truth and the fiction/lack of truth/lie of a matter and then correctly applying the proper action.
Don't you think using a metaphor for another metaphor would be confusing?? It wasn't just the "tree and its contents"----But as you previously expressed, """"who's taking the serpent out? he is stuck in literature as a metaphor for knowledge"""" .(high lighting added).
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
The Satan is not a red beast with horns in hell. The Satan is an angel named Gods Adversary. He has one job, to get people to prove they are worthy of God. Adam and Eve Failed.
Just read Job, Satan is up in Heaven with God and they discuss the little wager on Job. Same when The Satan temps Jesus, he is saying you say youre the son of God? Prove it buddy!
In Numbers 22:22 we actually see the Satan called the adversary, first we can read the word in Hebrew
The word adversary is lə·śā·ṭān which translates to adversary or The Satan
Now read it in the NESV
But Gods anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the LORD took his stand in the way as his adversary. Now he was riding on the donkey, and his two servants were with him.
Again in Job, most people read it this way,
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.
However the literal translation is this
And the day is, that sons of God come in to station themselves by Jehovah, and there doth come also the Adversary in their midst.
The Satan has been misinterpreted. He isnt an evil being, he is Gods prosecutor.
*
Just read Job, Satan is up in Heaven with God and they discuss the little wager on Job. Same when The Satan temps Jesus, he is saying you say youre the son of God? Prove it buddy!
In Numbers 22:22 we actually see the Satan called the adversary, first we can read the word in Hebrew
The word adversary is lə·śā·ṭān which translates to adversary or The Satan
Now read it in the NESV
But Gods anger was kindled because he went, and the angel of the LORD took his stand in the way as his adversary. Now he was riding on the donkey, and his two servants were with him.
Again in Job, most people read it this way,
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, and Satan also came among them.
However the literal translation is this
And the day is, that sons of God come in to station themselves by Jehovah, and there doth come also the Adversary in their midst.
The Satan has been misinterpreted. He isnt an evil being, he is Gods prosecutor.
*
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Hi Bobby, welcome to the Forums.
Correct, Satan/Adversary of GOD is not the depicted red horned figure with a pitch fork who resides in a burning "hell".
He is/was a highly honored Created angel(Lucifer) before his rebellion in the presence of the Almighty Creator GOD. He was persuasive enough to convince 1/3 of the other Angels to join him in his rebellion. After being cast out of Heaven, he did convince Adam and Eve to disobey/rebell against GOD.
Adam and Eve didn't have to prove anything to GOD; They were created in the "image" of their Creator. Obedience is a reflection of LOVE for; Disobedience/rebellion is a reflection/manifestation of an adversarial relationship.
"Adversary", as shown by you, can be used either as GOOD against Evil; Or as Evil against that which is GOOD. the Context determines.
In the case of the Being, the Hebrew word for the action he did remains for the Name of that being. He is still very much at war/enemy of the Creator GOD and us Human Beings.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
Thank you for the warm welcome...however I highly disagree with you on almost everything you have said. First off Lucifer is a latin term which means light bearer and it has no business being in any english translations, also in the Latin Vulgate there are a couple references where Jesus refers to himself as the lucifer. Most modern translations have the word Lucifer taken out now. It only appeared once and it was in Isaiah. People seem to take what John Milton wrote in Paradise Lost and think its biblical.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Hi Bobby, What has no business in any translations is the erroneous and contradictory material from the truth which the Creator GOD has stated.
I don't recall ever reading "Paradise Lost"---by Milton.
However, that which the Bible narrates--I believe
Satan does persecute, but he is not GOD'S prosecuter(there is no Biblical scripture for that position).
Last edited:
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
Well by that statement there is no verse that literally says Satan and 1/3 angels were cast out of heaven. I believe it says a dragon wiped away a third of the stars...you can interpret it anyway u like, but it doesn't specify them being fallen angels
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Verified: Rev.12:3-4, 7-9, "And there appeared another wonder in heaven; and behold a great red dragon, having seven heads and ten horns, and seven crowns upon his heads. And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth: and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.... And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels, And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven. And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Here's my version of the fall of the angelic.
I suspect it coincides with the creation of Man, and the prompts the appearence of the Adversary in the garden.....I quote myself.
"There is a long standing belief that the fall of the angelic..one third of heaven...was brought on by a division....an argument.
God, having made Man...a little less than the angelic...said to the angels...
"Man is fragile...follow after him and see to it, that he dash not his toes...nor his head."
One third of the angelic said "nay".
"For that Man is less than we are... He should be made to serve us."
There is nothing wrong in that logic.
Man does so unto lesser creatures in every way.
We... chain our dogs, and expect their loyalty...keeping to one master...even though it is their nature to run free in packs, and hunt at will.
We.... saddle and bridle our horses...and expect them to take us wherever we desire...and we break their spirits that they will obey.
We.... cage little birds..that they sing for our pleasure...but the little creature sings for a mate he will never find. There will be no nest...no offspring...and he will die in his solitude.
We...readily kill anything that cannot be made to serve us...any disobedient animal.
A fight broke out. Brother angel against Brother angel.
One third of the angelic fell from grace...losing their positions in heaven.
They lost their place because of an argument...concerning something that looks like you.
They want you dead.
Two thirds of heaven lost their Brothers because of an
argument...concerning something that looks like you.
Do you not bear resemblance to the one third fallen?
Do you not perform unto lesser things...and your fellowman ...as you will?
(end quote)
Several threads here at the forum bang the garden event back and forth.
But not often enough to get to the important perspectives.
God created angels....and then needed more?
And then created Man 'less than' the angelic....and this is more?
And then tells the angelic to serve Man.
So seeing God's Adversary in the garden, attempting to undo the effort...
is hard to believe?
I suspect it coincides with the creation of Man, and the prompts the appearence of the Adversary in the garden.....I quote myself.
"There is a long standing belief that the fall of the angelic..one third of heaven...was brought on by a division....an argument.
God, having made Man...a little less than the angelic...said to the angels...
"Man is fragile...follow after him and see to it, that he dash not his toes...nor his head."
One third of the angelic said "nay".
"For that Man is less than we are... He should be made to serve us."
There is nothing wrong in that logic.
Man does so unto lesser creatures in every way.
We... chain our dogs, and expect their loyalty...keeping to one master...even though it is their nature to run free in packs, and hunt at will.
We.... saddle and bridle our horses...and expect them to take us wherever we desire...and we break their spirits that they will obey.
We.... cage little birds..that they sing for our pleasure...but the little creature sings for a mate he will never find. There will be no nest...no offspring...and he will die in his solitude.
We...readily kill anything that cannot be made to serve us...any disobedient animal.
A fight broke out. Brother angel against Brother angel.
One third of the angelic fell from grace...losing their positions in heaven.
They lost their place because of an argument...concerning something that looks like you.
They want you dead.
Two thirds of heaven lost their Brothers because of an
argument...concerning something that looks like you.
Do you not bear resemblance to the one third fallen?
Do you not perform unto lesser things...and your fellowman ...as you will?
(end quote)
Several threads here at the forum bang the garden event back and forth.
But not often enough to get to the important perspectives.
God created angels....and then needed more?
And then created Man 'less than' the angelic....and this is more?
And then tells the angelic to serve Man.
So seeing God's Adversary in the garden, attempting to undo the effort...
is hard to believe?
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
Again I dont see a reference that this was a 1/3 of the angels...That was my argument was it not? And this verse says he was cast out into earth...why not hell? Also there is no biblical story of an angel being named Lucifer, this is stirctly based off John Milton. You may not have read it, but you may have been taught it and that is where the connection comes from.
Also if we take this verse literal, what happened to this beautiful angel called Lucifer you tried to describe, this devil sounds pretty scary and hideous. Its a red dragon with seven heads, ten horns and a long swishing tail!
It is never stated that the dragons angels were one third. Neither is there any reference of the these angels being divine and once belonging to God. They are specifically referred to as the dragons angels (angel only means messanger, they can be divine or human). The belief that one third of Gods angels were cast out of heaven has no basis in the Bible.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
Its also clear, after reading Revelation and reading other places where The Adversary makes an appearance, this dragon and the angel of God, which is states the adversary is, are not the same creature.
Using your logic and saying that the satan is a title, then it is possible for God to have a Satan, which is the case in, Numbers 22 and in book of Job, and it is also possible for something evil to be a satan...wouldnt you agree?
Using your logic and saying that the satan is a title, then it is possible for God to have a Satan, which is the case in, Numbers 22 and in book of Job, and it is also possible for something evil to be a satan...wouldnt you agree?
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
No it's not hard to believe at all, the only thing is...it isn't biblical, there isn't a falling of gods adversary story anywhere. Your theory is also very closely related to John Milton's Epic, that is where this fall of Lucifer because he failed to serve man and he and his followers (1/3 of the angels) were cast out of heaven and sent to a place called Hell aka Pandæmonium. Great story, not biblical but great none the less.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Stories...as you pointed out....
need not be biblical to be spiritual.
I found it easy to link the fall of the angels to the deception in the garden.
sincerly
Well-Known Member
Hi Bobby, I suppose we need to clear up some misconceptions. The books of Revelations a Daniel both have parts which are symbolic and these are known by/for their context. While symbolic, they never-the-less have literal applications/meanings.
Jesus, in Luke10:17-18, attests to the fact that HE personally witnessed the casting out of Satan from heaven. "And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through thy name. And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven." (It was Jesus who GOD gave the Revelation to for showing to John.)
I see in the scriptures a lot of names applied to "the serpent, satan, devil, evil one, dragon, deceiver of the world, etc.; and Also, many scriptures stating/indicating "legions of angels"/followers of his.
BobbyisStrange said:
It isn't my logic, but the scriptural usage of the words translated as adversary, satan such as "satan"(
1) adversary, one who withstands
a) adversary (in general - personal or national)
2) superhuman adversary
a) Satan (as noun pr)
and "tsarar"(Ex.23:22){But if thou shalt indeed obey his voice, and do all that I speak; then I will be an enemy unto thine enemies, and an adversary unto thine adversaries."
and how in context the "English equivalent" was derived concerning. Also, The descriptions vary with the context. Sin is NOT very pretty---in the end results.
Each can believe as it pleases them----or they can understand the messages and meaning which GOD intended. Still it is one's choice.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
I find this no different than Exod 19:18
Mount Sinai was covered with smoke, because the Lord descended on it in fire.
BobbyisStrange
The Adversary
You didn’t prove this usage at all, nor did you support it the claim what so ever. By showing me a verse that says thy shall be an adversary to my adversaries? That proves your point? No, i think it makes my case stronger, why? Because you completely got it wrong.
In Hebrew Exodus 23:22
ki im-sha·mo·a' tish·ma be·ko·lov, ve·'a·si·ta kol a·sher a·dab·ber; ve·'a·yav·ti et-o·ye·vei·cha, ve·tzar·ti et-tzo·re·rei·cha.
Which means
That if to listen you are listening in voice of him and you do all of which I am speaking and I enemy ones being enemies of you and I am foe ones being foe of you.
The word satan or adversary is not present; it was translated different to English.
Another thing, Adversary isn’t a negative term. If we were to play a game of checkers, you would be my adversary, not my enemy.
[/quote] Each can believe as it pleases them----or they can understand the messages and meaning which GOD intended. Still it is one's choice.[/quote]
Quite a arrogant claim, it just shows you are unable to be shown evidence, which is what i expected from a person who believes they know what God intended, my be/feel great to be infallible in scripture. The stance I hold is not new; Judaism has believed this very thing since their beginning.
Last edited: