Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ziffel · 03-01-2006, 08:17 AM

Isaiah 14:12-15 (New International Version)

Quote:

12 How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

13 You said in your heart,
"I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain.

14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High."

15 But you are brought down to the grave,
to the depths of the pit.

I'm pretty sure the vast majority of Christians agree that this passage refers to Lucifer, who, after being cast down, became Satan. Keep in mind also that the bible also says that God cast out "a third" of all the angels along with Lucifer.

This is a pretty good illustration of how the religious mind works, that Christians see no problem with this event. They see no logical fallacy. I know, because I was one, and it never once occurred to me that there might be a problem here. This story was simply "how the devil got started".

First of all, I thought the difference between man and angels was that man had free will, and the angels did not. The purpose of God creating man, was to have a being with the ability to choose him, or reject him. So that choosing to worship God was an expression of true love.

This leads to a few problems in logic.

a) if angels didn't have free will, how did Lucifer and the other angels get cast out?

b) remember now, that Lucifer and the other angels are God's creations, since God created all things. They are not other gods, or lesser gods if you will. they were created by God. These beings stood before the throne of God and looked at him directly. They saw him in all his awesome holiness and pwer. They saw who God was. And they rejected him! Did you hear that? They saw God face to face and decided they could do better!

Look at this Christian apologetics website that actually attempts to use these events to defend God's judgement of mankind:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/unfairgod.html

Quote:

Believe it or not, things could be much worse and "unfair" had you been created as an angel instead of a human. Atheists often complain that the evidence is insufficient to believe in God and would have preferred to be in a creation where they could see God directly. This sounds good on the surface, but God's judgment on those who have direct evidence of His existence is significantly more severe. The angels, who have seen God directly, have no latitude regarding sin. In other words, all angels who have sinned - even one time - have already been cast out of the presence of God and will be thrown into hell at the judgment. Personally, I am glad that I am a human, and have not seen God directly yet.

Here, the author admits that the angels "saw God directly". He admits that the angels had the capacity to commit sin, and did in fact do just that. He fails to see the severe problems with this defense.

You would think, according to the many scriptures that define God's awesome presence, that any being that merely gazed upon him would be in such awe, that he could not help but fall to his knees and worship and sing his praises. Apparently, angels, like humans can grow accustomed to things, and develop a kind of "meh" attitude, even towards God!

Can angels sin? apparently so. And if they can, they must have free will, correct? Even if a defense is used that says Lucifer did not exhibit free will, but rather pride, what about all the other angels? They HAD to make a choice. They had to choose to either continue worshipping God, or to follow Lucifer's lead.

So if angels have free will, and the ability to choose or reject God, why create man? And since he created man, what is so awesome about God, that we should choose to worship him, when a third of angels didn't find him worthy?

I consider this just more evidence that the bible is a book of myths and fairy tales.

mdarus · 03-01-2006, 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziffel

Isaiah 14:12-15 (New International Version)
So if angels have free will, and the ability to choose or reject God, why create man? And since he created man, what is so awesome about God, that we should choose to worship him, when a third of angels didn't find him worthy?

I consider this just more evidence that the bible is a book of myths and fairy tales.

Sorry. You haven't found anything new. Christian believe that angels have (had) free will. They identify the fallen angels as demons. The admit that some faced with absolute proof of God's existence and love will still reject him. According to the gospels, the same thing happened to Jesus. Even those that witnessed his miracles and heard him teach (even one of his disciples) turned against him.

I sense among atheists the false belief , "If God would show himself, all would believe. Since he does not show himself he is just being mean and evil." A major theme of the Bible seems to be that miracles don't produce faith. You are resonable to presume that angels who knew God face to face would never turn against him. But evidently you are wrong.

richard2 · 03-01-2006, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziffel

First of all, I thought the difference between man and angels was that man had free will, and the angels did not. The purpose of God creating man, was to have a being with the ability to choose him, or reject him. So that choosing to worship God was an expression of true love.

This leads to a few problems in logic...

Nope. Angels have free will according to Christians. I'm not sure where you picked up the idea that they don't.

Mabus_Zero · 03-01-2006, 07:17 PM

The meaning of this selection can be debated, though. It sprouted up around the time that the King of Babylon was being destroyed by the onrush of the Macedonians, and as historical record demonstrates, an insult levied againts him was that of 'the morningstar', because he had an inflated ego.

Diogenes the Cynic · 03-01-2006, 08:26 PM

The passage has nothing to do with Satan or any other angel. "Lucifer" means "light bearer" in Latin and is the Vulgate translation of the LXX word heosphoros ("dawn bringer," the Greek name for Venus) which is in turn a translation of the Hebrew helel ben-shachar ("shining one, son of the morning").

The passage in question is a poetic comparison of the king of Babylon to the planet Venus - the morning star which ascends briefly at dawn, only to sink "to the grave." eclipsed by the brilliance of the sun.

On the day the LORD gives you relief from suffering and turmoil and cruel bondage, 4 you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon:
How the oppressor has come to an end!
How his fury [a] has ended!

5 The LORD has broken the rod of the wicked,
the scepter of the rulers,

6 which in anger struck down peoples
with unceasing blows,
and in fury subdued nations
with relentless aggression.

7 All the lands are at rest and at peace;
they break into singing.

8 Even the pine trees and the cedars of Lebanon
exult over you and say,
"Now that you have been laid low,
no woodsman comes to cut us down."

9 The grave [b] below is all astir
to meet you at your coming;
it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you—
all those who were leaders in the world;
it makes them rise from their thrones—
all those who were kings over the nations.

10 They will all respond,
they will say to you,
"You also have become weak, as we are;
you have become like us."

11 All your pomp has been brought down to the grave,
along with the noise of your harps;
maggots are spread out beneath you
and worms cover you.

12 How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

13 You said in your heart,
"I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. [c]

14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High."

15 But you are brought down to the grave,
to the depths of the pit.

Gullwind · 03-01-2006, 08:57 PM

If, as Christians believe, the serpent in the garden was Satan, then sin was already in the garden, and hence the world, when Adam and Eve ate the fruit. Adam didn't bring sin there, Satan did.

I once had a fundamentalist tell me that Satan's rejection of God could not be sin, because there couldn't have been sin in the garden prior to the fruit eating. He didn't know what to call it, but it wasn't sin. :banghead:

mdarus · 03-02-2006, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gullwind

If, as Christians believe, the serpent in the garden was Satan, then sin was already in the garden, and hence the world, when Adam and Eve ate the fruit. Adam didn't bring sin there, Satan did.

I once had a fundamentalist tell me that Satan's rejection of God could not be sin, because there couldn't have been sin in the garden prior to the fruit eating. He didn't know what to call it, but it wasn't sin. :banghead:

I don't blame you for being frustrated. The fundamentalist was not representing the normal Christian undertanding of the chronology. Most Christians believe (as you imply) that Satan's fall preceded Adam's.

mdarus · 03-02-2006, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

The passage has nothing to do with Satan or any other angel. "Lucifer" means "light bearer" in Latin and is the Vulgate translation of the LXX word heosphoros ("dawn bringer," the Greek name for Venus) which is in turn a translation of the Hebrew helel ben-shachar ("shining one, son of the morning").

The passage in question is a poetic comparison of the king of Babylon to the planet Venus - the morning star which ascends briefly at dawn, only to sink "to the grave." eclipsed by the brilliance of the sun.

On the day the LORD gives you relief from suffering and turmoil and cruel bondage, 4 you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon:

12 How you have fallen from heaven,
O morning star, son of the dawn!
You have been cast down to the earth,
you who once laid low the nations!

13 You said in your heart,
"I will ascend to heaven;
I will raise my throne
above the stars of God;
I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly,
on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. [c]

14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds;
I will make myself like the Most High."

15 But you are brought down to the grave,
to the depths of the pit.

Many interpreters agree with you that the primary reference is to the King of Babylon but they also see a description of rebellion consistant with

Quote:

2 Corinthians 11:14
And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light.

The reference to angel of light seems to connect with Lucifer.

chapka · 03-02-2006, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdarus

Sorry. You haven't found anything new. Christian believe that angels have (had) free will. They identify the fallen angels as demons. The admit that some faced with absolute proof of God's existence and love will still reject him. According to the gospels, the same thing happened to Jesus. Even those that witnessed his miracles and heard him teach (even one of his disciples) turned against him.

I sense among atheists the false belief , "If God would show himself, all would believe. Since he does not show himself he is just being mean and evil." A major theme of the Bible seems to be that miracles don't produce faith. You are resonable to presume that angels who knew God face to face would never turn against him. But evidently you are wrong.

The problem with this argument is that it only addresses the argument:

"If God would show himself, all would believe"

not the more reasonable argument:

"If God would show himself, more would believe"

After all, the Bible does say that some people were convinced by Jesus' miracles. If God showing himself would save even a few people, wouldn't it be worthwhile?

Plus, of course, you haven't provided any actual evidence as for why the "reasonable" proposition that someone who knew God face to face would be very unlikely to rebel. What you've esssentially said is, "Yes, I realize that this thing the Bible says is nonsense. But the Bible says it, so it must be true." That's not very persuasive to my mind.

Hazy Daisy · 03-02-2006, 10:08 AM

Regardless of the proper interpretation of the passage, I too am familiar with the general mythology as ziffel lays it out. You bring up an interesting point, ziffel, and one that can be used against Christians who argue from the point of view you outlined. Thanks.

Edited to add: A corollary problem is that of whether humans who die and go to heaven can possibly continue to have free will after they get there. If they've been sinners all their lives and only get into heaven on the "Jesus died for me" ticket, doesn't it stand to reason that they'll sin again in heaven, and probably get thrown out just like one third of the angels did? Unless they don't have free will anymore... but then the whole "God made us with free will so we could choose him or not" thing falls apart if we only have temporary free will here on earth.

03-01-2006, 08:26 PM	#5
Diogenes the Cynic Moderator - Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota Posts: 4,639	The passage has nothing to do with Satan or any other angel. "Lucifer" means "light bearer" in Latin and is the Vulgate translation of the LXX word heosphoros ("dawn bringer," the Greek name for Venus) which is in turn a translation of the Hebrew helel ben-shachar ("shining one, son of the morning"). The passage in question is a poetic comparison of the king of Babylon to the planet Venus - the morning star which ascends briefly at dawn, only to sink "to the grave." eclipsed by the brilliance of the sun. On the day the LORD gives you relief from suffering and turmoil and cruel bondage, 4 you will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon: How the oppressor has come to an end! How his fury [a] has ended! 5 The LORD has broken the rod of the wicked, the scepter of the rulers, 6 which in anger struck down peoples with unceasing blows, and in fury subdued nations with relentless aggression. 7 All the lands are at rest and at peace; they break into singing. 8 Even the pine trees and the cedars of Lebanon exult over you and say, "Now that you have been laid low, no woodsman comes to cut us down." 9 The grave [b] below is all astir to meet you at your coming; it rouses the spirits of the departed to greet you— all those who were leaders in the world; it makes them rise from their thrones— all those who were kings over the nations. 10 They will all respond, they will say to you, "You also have become weak, as we are; you have become like us." 11 All your pomp has been brought down to the grave, along with the noise of your harps; maggots are spread out beneath you and worms cover you. 12 How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! 13 You said in your heart, "I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God; I will sit enthroned on the mount of assembly, on the utmost heights of the sacred mountain. [c] 14 I will ascend above the tops of the clouds; I will make myself like the Most High." 15 But you are brought down to the grave, to the depths of the pit.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-01-2006, 07:17 PM	#4
Mabus_Zero Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: California Posts: 190	The meaning of this selection can be debated, though. It sprouted up around the time that the King of Babylon was being destroyed by the onrush of the Macedonians, and as historical record demonstrates, an insult levied againts him was that of 'the morningstar', because he had an inflated ego.

03-01-2006, 08:57 PM	#6
Gullwind Veteran Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Colorado Posts: 1,037	If, as Christians believe, the serpent in the garden was Satan, then sin was already in the garden, and hence the world, when Adam and Eve ate the fruit. Adam didn't bring sin there, Satan did. I once had a fundamentalist tell me that Satan's rejection of God could not be sin, because there couldn't have been sin in the garden prior to the fruit eating. He didn't know what to call it, but it wasn't sin. :banghead:

03-02-2006, 10:08 AM	#10
Hazy Daisy Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: US Posts: 653	Regardless of the proper interpretation of the passage, I too am familiar with the general mythology as ziffel lays it out. You bring up an interesting point, ziffel, and one that can be used against Christians who argue from the point of view you outlined. Thanks. Edited to add: A corollary problem is that of whether humans who die and go to heaven can possibly continue to have free will after they get there. If they've been sinners all their lives and only get into heaven on the "Jesus died for me" ticket, doesn't it stand to reason that they'll sin again in heaven, and probably get thrown out just like one third of the angels did? Unless they don't have free will anymore... but then the whole "God made us with free will so we could choose him or not" thing falls apart if we only have temporary free will here on earth.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.