Error in Theology

NavyGuy7 · Sep 20, 2007

"angel" is a pretty broad term though. He can be an evil angel without being a fallen one, and fits with the Accuser view of the Devil.

BUT evil can easily be argued as being a synonym, of sorts, of "fallen". Thus a fallen angel and an evil angel are the same thing. Here's another word for those two, by the way.
Demon.

And yes, Venus may be the morning star in the physical universe. So basically, I'd think you were saying God is the planet Venus. LOL. Give me some direct bible verses that say Jesus is calling himself Lucifer, or Satan, and maybe you'll have a point to argue from. LOL.

phsyxx · Sep 20, 2007

InfernalFather said:
They even go as far to suggest that Satan fell in the state of Lucifer; but according to the truth about scripture, the word lucifer was never mentioned in the original text of the bible. The only time that it is found is in Isaiah; but the word lucifer was merely a translation of an oppressive Babylonian king's name.

And that is the truth.

Not even that - if you go to www.godchecker.com and look at the entry for Lucifer under L in the Roman gods section, you'll find that it means "god of the dawn" or something like that (the server's down at time of posting) -
which means that , yes, indeed Lucifer was not even translated across into the Bible and has been misused since.

phsyxx · Sep 20, 2007

NavyGuy7 said:
I honestly don't think there is a contradiction. What Jesus meant was that Lucifer would become one. Because he had the potential, means, in theory, that he was a liar and murderer from the beginning. He had the ability, the potential, and acted upon it.

Plus, anyone can cherry-pick. I just did it in the above statements. So why not post the WHOLE verse, or even tell us where it CAN be found? Then maybe you will have a basis for an fair argument here.

And i get the feeling I inspired this thread. It's just too much of a coincidence that we were talking about Lucifer's fall in your "serious question" thread, and this appears shortly afterwards. I'm not so sure I feel good about it. But it's human nature to explore all options.

The problem occurs because GOD is the creator of ALL things - which means that your Satan here, is NOT responsible for how he was created, and therefore, GOD is -

God would then be responsible for all the evil that is present in the world.
THAT's the problem with the theology.

NavyGuy7 · Sep 22, 2007

Hrm.... yet you are forgetting the concept of free will. So it would be better for God to act out of coldness and not create you because he knew sin was to be your lot? It would be better for man not to exist at all?

And God is -... what is the "-" standing for, here? Afraid to speak your mind? Or is it some mark I'm not accustomed to using here in the D&D yet? Please, enlighten me as to what you are SAYING.

AND I noticed you ignored my last post altogether, the last part, anyway. My challenge still holds, sirrah. Just know I'm not partial to taking links elsewhere.

Blackguard_ · Sep 22, 2007

BUT evil can easily be argued as being a synonym, of sorts, of "fallen". Thus a fallen angel and an evil angel are the same thing.

No, fallen and evil are not interchangable.
Fallen says something about how/why they are evil, i.e. they fell from perfection, but to call something evil is to just call it evil without reference to it's origin.

By using fallen you assume they were created good.

Here's another word for those two, by the way.
Demon.

Your point being?

And yes, Venus may be the morning star in the physical universe. So basically, I'd think you were saying God is the planet Venus. LOL.

Do you know what a symbol is?

Give me some direct bible verses that say Jesus is calling himself Lucifer, or Satan, and maybe you'll have a point to argue from. LOL.

Lucifer =/= Satan. And Jesus refers to himself as Lucifer just as much as that Isaiah 14 passage refers to the Babylon king, or whoever that symbolizes, as such.

If Jesus doesn't call himself Lucifer, Isaish 14 calls no one Lucifer either.

Isaiah 14:12
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!

Revelation 22:16
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

phsyxx · Sep 22, 2007

NavyGuy7 said:
Hrm.... yet you are forgetting the concept of free will. So it would be better for God to act out of coldness and not create you because he knew sin was to be your lot? It would be better for man not to exist at all?

And God is -... what is the "-" standing for, here? Afraid to speak your mind? Or is it some mark I'm not accustomed to using here in the D&D yet? Please, enlighten me as to what you are SAYING.

AND I noticed you ignored my last post altogether, the last part, anyway. My challenge still holds, sirrah. Just know I'm not partial to taking links elsewhere.

Sorry.....to whom are you replying?

OldWiseGuy · Sep 23, 2007

Blackguard_ said:
Isaiah 14:12
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!

Revelation 22:16
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

The being generally known as Lucifer was cast down to the earth, and therefore is no longer Morning Star. The one known as Jesus is to replace the one known as Lucifer, and is therefore now Morning Star. The title of 'Morning Star' was given to Jesus (the final crushing of Satan's head(ship)?).

owg

Yyharssargyhaell · Sep 23, 2007

I think instead He meant that he [Satan] was a liar and murderer from the beginning of the world, or mankind, or something along those lines. As far as I am informed, we know Lucifer was at one time one of God's favored angels.

phsyxx said:
The problem occurs because GOD is the creator of ALL things - which means that your Satan here, is NOT responsible for how he was created, and therefore, GOD is -

God would then be responsible for all the evil that is present in the world.
THAT's the problem with the theology.

I like to think of evil as being God's shadow, not literally since a shadow is part of you, but metaphorically. Evil exists because it is the force opposite Him. It creates a balance. God did not create it.

I mean, going by your argument - God created ALL things. This means He would have had to created Himself too.

Y.

phsyxx · Sep 23, 2007

NavyGuy7 said:
Hrm.... yet you are forgetting the concept of free will. So it would be better for God to act out of coldness and not create you because he knew sin was to be your lot? It would be better for man not to exist at all?

And God is -... what is the "-" standing for, here? Afraid to speak your mind? Or is it some mark I'm not accustomed to using here in the D&D yet? Please, enlighten me as to what you are SAYING.

AND I noticed you ignored my last post altogether, the last part, anyway. My challenge still holds, sirrah. Just know I'm not partial to taking links elsewhere.

and you're forgetting that the concept of free will in the face of an all-powerful God is a ridiculous notion.

Equally - if free will is so prevalent and has been gifted upon man, then why on Earth does God send those that doen't worship him to hell?
Equally - free will inherently means "free" as in free from constraints. The above is a constraint. If you have free will - then God has no part in your life, as all your decisions are your own and have nothing to do with him.

phsyxx · Sep 23, 2007

Yyharssargyhaell said:
I mean, going by your argument - God created ALL things. This means He would have had to created Himself too.

Y.

Oh, ok - he didn't create himself or evil, or anything that's not worth mentioning.....

but he's still the creator, and the all-powerful God!
.......
I'm not sure how that stands up.

(I apologise if my post seems a touch sarcastic.)

Yyharssargyhaell · Sep 23, 2007

phsyxx said:
Oh, ok - he didn't create himself or evil, or anything that's not worth mentioning.....

but he's still the creator, and the all-powerful God!
.......
I'm not sure how that stands up.

(I apologise if my post seems a touch sarcastic.)

No, I'm curious as to the thoughts of others. If He created EVERYTHING then wouldn't He have had to created Himself too? I'm still learning and most certainly do not have all of the answers.

Christians profess God is love. In fact, a lot of religions profess this. Love is a thing, maybe not tangible, but it is a thing that exists. In the beginning there was nothing. So where did love come from? Was God just blank in the beginning? Or did He not exist? Did He just manifest out of no where as He is and then decide to create the world out of love?

Y.

NavyGuy7 · Sep 23, 2007

Blackguard_ said:
By using fallen you assume they were created good.

Hence the word, fallen. Thanks for summing that up for me quite nicely!

Isaiah 14:12
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!

Revelation 22:16
"I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."[/quote]

Hrm.... there's clearly a contradiction here. These must be two different "morning" stars. And I do understand symbols. They can stand for MANY things. Not just one.
I still don't see how you connected these two verses as being Jesus. The capitalization (though seemingly irrelevant) casts some shadow as to your interpretation. And it does not say CLEARLY that Jesus is calling himself Lucifer by referring to himself as the "Bright" Morning star, as opposed to just "morning star". If that's all you have to back up your claims, I'm afraid you're left biting the bullet of circumstantial "evidence", if this is even that.
"Cover your eyes, children... this is going to be a bloody battle. Maybe."

NavyGuy7 · Sep 23, 2007

phsyxx said:
Sorry.....to whom are you replying?

The post before that post, of course. You, in other words, my dear Physxx.

NavyGuy7 · Sep 23, 2007

Yyharssargyhaell said:
I think instead He meant that he [Satan] was a liar and murderer from the beginning of the world, or mankind, or something along those lines. As far as I am informed, we know Lucifer was at one time one of God's favored angels.

I like to think of evil as being God's shadow, not literally since a shadow is part of you, but metaphorically. Evil exists because it is the force opposite Him. It creates a balance. God did not create it.

I mean, going by your argument - God created ALL things. This means He would have had to created Himself too.

Y.

LOL. Sorry. But I'm sure it's said somewhere, that God is infinite. He has always existed. Therefore, no one created him. He has always been there. So I'm told.
Evil exists because of choices, free will. First was Satan, when he thought he could become like God and got the divine smackdown to the earth. Second was when Adam and Eve sinned by disobeying God. They both had the choice to do the right thing, but chose the wrong choice instead.
But without that free will, God would have created just "robots" in the metaphorical sense. I don't think he'd be satisfied with "robots" who only followed him out of no choice.

phsyxx · Sep 24, 2007

Yyharssargyhaell said:
No, I'm curious as to the thoughts of others. If He created EVERYTHING then wouldn't He have had to created Himself too? I'm still learning and most certainly do not have all of the answers.

Christians profess God is love. In fact, a lot of religions profess this. Love is a thing, maybe not tangible, but it is a thing that exists. In the beginning there was nothing. So where did love come from? Was God just blank in the beginning? Or did He not exist? Did He just manifest out of no where as He is and then decide to create the world out of love?

Y.

See, what has always confused me is - if God creates from nothing "creatio ex nihilo" - then how on Earth did He come into existence?
If God has ALWAYS existed - then doesn't that mean that God didn't create himself...

I mean, a being that is able to create the known and the unknown universe surely must be so complex as to require an explanation for His existence.
For me, when people refute the possibility that the universe just is with - it has to have been created, God is no better an explanation - as we just regress a step further.

phsyxx · Sep 24, 2007

NavyGuy7 said:
But without that free will, God would have created just "robots" in the metaphorical sense. I don't think he'd be satisfied with "robots" who only followed him out of no choice.

So, navyguy7, you'd accept that God accepts that all beings have free will - not just humans?
Or is human exclusivity one of the things that God made?

Erm, equally - do you believe in a hell?
Because quite a common belief is that non-believers go to Hell - and, well, if God has given humans free will, as you say, then surely they should have the freedom from punishment for not believing in God?

phsyxx · Sep 24, 2007

NavyGuy7 said:
The post before that post, of course. You, in other words, my dear Physxx.

Thanks. I just like to be clear on these things. Usually I make a reference to which post I'm replying, either by quotation, or by addressing the recipient.

Blackguard_ · Sep 24, 2007

Hence the word, fallen. Thanks for summing that up for me quite nicely!

That's called "begging the question".

Hrm.... there's clearly a contradiction here. These must be two different "morning" stars. And I do understand symbols. They can stand for MANY things. Not just one.

Did I say there was one?

I still don't see how you connected these two verses as being Jesus.

You really don't get what I'm saying do you? I said Jesus is called Lucifer just as much as the person in Isaiah 14 is. I never said the person in Isaiah 14 was Jesus.

The capitalization (though seemingly irrelevant) casts some shadow as to your interpretation.

1. I do not interpret that way.
2. The capitalization is irrelevant. Biblical-era Greek is all capitals. It's an interpretation following the 19th century convention of capitalizing titles of God and pronouns refering to God, e.g. Him, Father, Holy Spirit.

And it does not say CLEARLY that Jesus is calling himself Lucifer by referring to himself as the "Bright" Morning star, as opposed to just "morning star".

Lucifer means "light bearer", so calling the bright morning star that is actually more appropiate.

And I am not arguing Jesus called himself Lucifer, but that if the person in Isaiah 14 is referred to as Lucifer, then Jesus is referring to himself as Lucifer.

Or, look at this the other way; the person in Isaiah 14 is not referred to as lucifer, so then Jesus does not refer to himself as lucifer.

Your problem is you won't have it any other way then Isaiah 14 calling someone lucifer.

You also seem to have a Lucifer=Bad hang-up. So what if Jesus called himself Lucifer? He's the bright morning star, and the light of the world, a "light bearer" if ever there was one.

NavyGuy7 · Sep 24, 2007

phsyxx said:
So, navyguy7, you'd accept that God accepts that all beings have free will - not just humans?
Or is human exclusivity one of the things that God made?

Erm, equally - do you believe in a hell?
Because quite a common belief is that non-believers go to Hell - and, well, if God has given humans free will, as you say, then surely they should have the freedom from punishment for not believing in God?

You are missing the point. He gave us free will to choose either separation from him or to be with him eternally. That way those who WANT to be with him can. And of course I believe in Hell. Without it, what would be the point of Christ dying for our sins? The whole point was to spare us from that fate, and so that we wouldn't be separated from him anymore.
And you must also remember, that if God spares punishment, then what would be the point in Christ dying for our sins? (yes, I said that in the last paragraph). God is merciful, but he is also just. After all, Jesus' second coming in Revelation will be as a Judge. If you die without having accepted Christ, then you have basically chosen to be separated from God. There is no "neutral" or "lukewarm" ground.

NavyGuy7 · Sep 24, 2007

Blackguard_ said:
That's called "begging the question".

Did I say there was one?

You really don't get what I'm saying do you? I said Jesus is called Lucifer just as much as the person in Isaiah 14 is. I never said the person in Isaiah 14 was Jesus.

1. I do not interpret that way.
2. The capitalization is irrelevant. Biblical-era Greek is all capitals. It's an interpretation following the 19th century convention of capitalizing titles of God and pronouns refering to God, e.g. Him, Father, Holy Spirit.

Lucifer means "light bearer", so calling the bright morning star that is actually more appropiate.

And I am not arguing Jesus called himself Lucifer, but that if the person in Isaiah 14 is referred to as Lucifer, then Jesus is referring to himself as Lucifer.

Or, look at this the other way; the person in Isaiah 14 is not referred to as lucifer, so then Jesus does not refer to himself as lucifer.

Your problem is you won't have it any other way then Isaiah 14 calling someone lucifer.

You also seem to have a Lucifer=Bad hang-up. So what if Jesus called himself Lucifer? He's the bright morning star, and the light of the world, a "light bearer" if ever there was one.

This last part....yah, I do have a Lucifer=Bad hang up. It's been established as another name of Satan, in the world anyway. It would give people the excuse to say Christianity is nothing more than a Satanic cult. Believe me when I say that people WILL stoop that low.
Besides, you don't seem to have any conclusive evidence, anyway. And "Bright Morning Star" and "light-bearer" aren't really the same thing.

Error in Theology

NavyGuy7

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

NavyGuy7

Guest

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

Senior Member

Wake me when it's soup.

Active Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Active Member

NavyGuy7

Guest

NavyGuy7

Guest

NavyGuy7

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

NavyGuy7

Guest

NavyGuy7

Guest

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency