5

I ask this question because I did not see anything that really answered the question. Also out of recommendation by fredsbend - but what is the basis for this?

Don't get me wrong, first of all, as I grew up being taught this same thing. However, the more I read and the more I learned, I realized such a thing does not exist in Scripture at least as much as I have read. I begin with some verses attributed to being about Satan, but follow with clear and precise objections to them being the case - these objections will also be in Scripture. As we know, Scripture cannot contradict Scripture, hence why I use the Bible as a guide on these matters. So let's begin with the most popular:

Isaiah 14:12-15

How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

This is not about Satan, who is incorrectly identified as "Lucifer". Further reading both before and after these verses indicate that this is written about a man, the then King of Babylon.

Isaiah 14:4

That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!

A common argument is that Satan/Lucifer is described as "King of Babylon". However, we see nothing in Scripture to make such an inference. Then you have God calling this King a man in verses 16-17

They that see thee shall narrowly look upon thee, and consider thee, saying, Is this the > man that made the earth to tremble, that did shake kingdoms; That made the world as a wilderness, and destroyed the cities thereof; that opened not the house of his prisoners?

Next is Ezekiel Chapter 28, which is largely attributed to being about Satan, however it cannot be because reading it from the beginning we see this is about the Prince/King of Tyrus/Tyre depending on your version. God starts this immediately by saying this individual is about a man.

28:2

Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is > lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the > seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:

Other verses attributed to being about Satan and his fall is the falling of the Watchers (which is post-Eden, therefor wrong) and incorrectly quoting Revelation as a past event. We know the Dragon WILL be cast from the heavens with his army, but this has yet to pass. As a man, it would not be wrong for God to say he was in the Garden, as this could be a reference to ALL mankind, instead of the individual.

Also, I have seen nothing to support the idea that Satan was the snake in the Garden. Instead, it was a snake with legs that could speak. If it were Satan, where would his fall take place? Surely not long after Adam in Isaiah's prophecy?

In regards to Lucifer - this word is derived from the Latin lux ferre, which is used only twice in the Vulgate, once for the Isaiah verse and another in Revelation used by Jesus when He calls Himself "the Light of the World"/"Bringer of Light"/etc title depending on your version.

Many refer to Christ's mention of seeing the Devil fall from Heaven. However, we forget Jesus more than likely could prophesy, and as such that COULD have been an allusion to His Revelation, where the Dragon is in fact cast down.

I am curious on what others think and what other groups teach, and am interested in answers of all varieties. I apologize for the lengthiness by the way.

Improve this question
2
  • Yes, a bit verbose, but I want to let you know that the answers you will likely get will be along the lines of "Christians do think that these verse refer to Satan." And hopefully, they will tell you why too. Though you may disagree, that is how a "biblical basis" question works. See question types that the community finds acceptable for reference. – fгedsbend Jul 7 '14 at 17:43
  • 1
    I understand those are the types of answers I will receive - and they are the types I want. I want to know the Who/What/Where/When/How? of this particular case, and most of all the Why? I asked the question in a way that, I felt, asked not to just say "Yep we think that" but invoke the question of "Why do we think that"? – Jesse Jul 7 '14 at 17:56
3

One particular Scriptural reference you haven't given is in Job 1:6–12

One day, when the sons of God came to present themselves before the LORD, the satan also came among them. The LORD said to the satan, "Where have you been?" Then the satan answered the LORD and said, "Roaming the earth and patrolling it." The LORD said to the satan, "Have you noticed my servant Job? There is no one on earth like him, blameless and upright, fearing God and avoiding evil." The satan answered the LORD and said, "Is it for nothing that Job is God-fearing? Have you not surrounded him and his family and all that he has with your protection? You have blessed the work of his hands, and his livestock are spread over the land. But now put forth your hand and touch all that he has, and surely he will curse you to your face." The LORD said to the satan, "Very well, all that he has is in your power; only do not lay a hand on him." So the satan went forth from the presence of the LORD.

(Translation: New American Bible, Revised Edition)

There is a note to "the sons of God" which reads:

members of the divine council; see Gn 6:1–4; Dt 32:8; Ps 82:1. The satan: lit., "adversary" (as in 1 Kgs 11:14). Here a member of the heavenly court, "the accuser" (Zec 3:1). In later biblical traditions this character will be developed as the devil (Gk. diabolos, "adversary").

This is an unusual depiction of "the Devil", as it depicts him as a servant of, rather than a rebel against, God; but it does also exemplify his depiction as a heavenly being, that is an angel.

Interestingly, Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologica doesn't appear to even question whether the Devil was in fact an angel. He describes the Devil as an angel (First Part, Question 63, Article 3 and Article 5). One very interesting thing is that in the latter Article he does quote the passages you cite from Isaiah and from Ezekiel, and he says "it is said of the devil under the figure of the prince of Babylon ... it is said to the devil in the person of the King of Tyre". In other words, although you are correct in interpreting the literal meaning of those two passages, typology intervenes and allows these two people to stand in for the Devil.

Improve this answer
3
  • I accepted this as the answer, as you brought up the only piece of Scripture I actually forgot, and that was Job 1:6-12. We can reasonably infer that Satan (if this is the Devil, being as Satan is an improper translation of ha-Satan) is indeed an angel, since it'd be odd for God to allow him into Heaven AFTER casting him out (this happens after Eden, so him and the snake cannot be the same). Also, as a servant and angel, he would not be able to rebel against God as we typically infer angels do not have a choice which was one of the reasons for man. – Jesse Jul 7 '14 at 18:31
  • I notice that @Flimzy removed the catholicism tag from the question. Is that what you intended? If not, perhaps you should re-phrase your question to focus on Catholicism; if this action was appropriate, then I'll appropriately re-scope my answer, as it's focused on the Catholic viewpoint. – Matt Gutting Jul 7 '14 at 18:37
  • I think the tag ended up there on accident via my clicking on something wrong more or less. No need to rescope, as it was Biblical basis for the question of Satan's angelic nature I asked, and to which you answered. – Jesse Jul 7 '14 at 18:40
2

Well it is worth mentioning that the devil was behind those evil kings and them having those beliefs of being gods opposed to God was because the devil was fueling them and or using them. As far as scripture goes when thoes things were said of those kings it was in regard to both the king and to the devil who was driving them. I also would have to say on this one that theological speculation must be used such,

(1) that God and the word of god existed before allthings (2) God is good and everything he creates in the begining is good, for the good God does not produce evil (3) the angels were created before man and animals, they beheld the creator at work in creation (4) the devil was afoot to decieve at Adam and Eve's begining

God is good he does not produce demons in genesis because they are not good, so the devil was not created evil,

The devil had to have been a angel at first because that was the only race of beings serving God before the advent of man.

The angels were the only race of beings capable of disobedience at that particular time

Improve this answer
2
  • I like your answer, and was by far more thought out than the ones I was expecting. However, you must accept the fact that God did, in fact, create evil as seen in Isaiah 45:7 "I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." So you're wrong in your (2). At (4), this does not answer the question of where the biblical basis is for them having been tempted by the Devil. Though we allude the fact that the Dragon/Satan was the snake because he was called a serpent. This is more than likely Leviathan (wriggling serpent), and not a though. – Jesse Jul 7 '14 at 17:53
  • @jesse, very interesting "God creating evil"? Isaiah 45:7. There should be some elaboration of what that really means. thanks for that comment and bringing that to my attention brother, Shalom. – eliyah Sep 5 '14 at 7:37
0

You are correct in your assertion that the King of Babylon does refer to a man. However; the reference to Lucifer may in fact be a comparison to the wickedness of Lucifer, which is a name given to Satan prior to his rebellion in Heaven.

Where we find that Satan, who has many names in the Bible, is a fallen Angel comes from Jesus and Revelation:

All Scripture is quoted from the King James translation unless otherwise noted.

Luke 10:18 And he said unto them, I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven.

and

Revelation 12:7 through 9 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.

The Book of the Revelation is broken down into three parts; the things that are, the things that were, the things that are yet to come.

In accordance with Jesus' words the war in Heaven had to have happened before then. And although we cannot say exactly when Satan and the rebellious Angels were ejected from Heaven we can say that according to Revelation 12:9 it had to be sometime after Genesis 1:1 and almost assuredly before the fall of man.

Improve this answer
6
  • Do you have a Biblical basis for any for that? I had also already stated that Luke 10:18 could very well have been a prophesy, which is again revealed through Revelation. Revelation can't be read as a Then/Now/Will be book because it can't read that way. The prophesy is specific and involves particular churches. So unless it is written wrong (which it cant be), there is no basis to that. This would also retcon (if you're familiar with the term) many of the important events DURING the tribulation. Lucifer is only used twice in Vulgate Scripture - once about the King and another about Jesus. – Jesse Jul 7 '14 at 18:16
  • @Jesse If you are asking me to prove the word of God I cannot go down that path either you believe that the Bible is true or you do not. Jesus never started a prophesy with a statement saying he had, nor to my knowledge has any other Prophet ever referred to a prophesy in the past tense. – BYE Jul 7 '14 at 18:22
  • I am not asking you to prove the Word, but give a Scriptural basis for the belief. You did, and I responded in kind. I did not set out to start a back and forth, but ask an honest question of the faith. – Jesse Jul 7 '14 at 18:26
  • @Jesse Comments is not meant to be a forum. It is not up to anyone on the site to try to convince you, We cannot handle the truth. – BYE Jul 7 '14 at 18:29
  • @Bye: The name Lucifer is nowhere in Scripture "a name given to Satan prior to his rebellion in Heaven". Quite the contrary, it is the Latin translation of the Hebrew Helel, and the Greek Phosphoros, both names of the morning star (cf. 1 Pet 2:19). Church tradition gives this name to Satan, on the basis of the passage in Isaiah, but there is no other Scriptural basis for it. Also, you may wish to reread Luke 10:18 in context, there is no need to interpret this as a past event, but rather as prophecy. On the contrary, according to John 12:31 it happened at or near the crucifixion. – Wlerin Oct 28 '14 at 18:11

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.