Why did God create Lucifer with the pride or whatever it was that made him rebel?

[HIM_In_Me_In_HIM]

If Lucifer decided to rebel, couldn't it only have been because God created him with the pride or whatever it was the made him want to?

Pssst....there is no Lucifer TRULY/accurately/etc., mentioned in the bible. Look up the original Hebrew for Isa 14:12 (u'll no doubt quote me...) & don't depend on KJV or any other subsequent version/translation prone to include (saint?) Jerome's "error." (from LXX, to Latin, to English...:o )

 

[Calminian]

Irrelevent, votes indicate that there is some kind of democracy going on. We humans are not part of that "demo", thus not allowed to vote.

With that said, I bet on free will. (mind you, betting is not the same as gambling.)

Pssst....there is no Lucifer TRULY/accurately/etc., mentioned in the bible. Look up the original Hebrew for Isa 14:12 (u'll no doubt quote me...) & don't depend on KJV or any other subsequent version/translation prone to include (saint?) Jerome's "error." (from LXX, to Latin, to English...:o )

This is true, BTW. There is no proper name "Lucifer" in the Bible. Satan was likely always named Satan.

 

[Rev Randy]

Pssst....there is no Lucifer TRULY/accurately/etc., mentioned in the bible. Look up the original Hebrew for Isa 14:12 (u'll no doubt quote me...) & don't depend on KJV or any other subsequent version/translation prone to include (saint?) Jerome's "error." (from LXX, to Latin, to English...:o )

I agree and also predict your statement will not be well received by the KJV only crowd.

 

[SwordFall]

If Lucifer decided to rebel, couldn't it only have been because God created him with the pride or whatever it was the made him want to?

Satan was intentionally created to test the will of man, an extraordinary role for an angel because of the great authority he would require.
It's sort of the reason why Satan is so mesmerizing. Terrible, but nonetheless mesmerizing- he is a particularly powerful being in relevance to other angels.

But because of the inherent pride it takes, having to go against God's desire to have us all in grace, he was ultimately filled with inequity.

You see, it's because of how mighty Satan was an angel that made him rebel- he was too sure of himself, and thought he could be God.

 

[HIM_In_Me_In_HIM]

Satan was intentionally created to test the will of man, an extraordinary role for an angel because of the great authority he would require.
It's sort of the reason why Satan is so mesmerizing. Terrible, but nonetheless mesmerizing- he is a particularly powerful being in relevance to other angels.

But because of the inherent pride it takes, having to go against God's desire to have us all in grace, he was ultimately filled with inequity.

You see, it's because of how mighty Satan was an angel that made him rebel- he was too sure of himself, and thought he could be God.

....this come from? Seems to me, we should be discussing/keeping our eyes upon/etc., Jesus, not Satan. Especially since Yeshua won b4, at, and after the cross, as "the prince of this world has been judged."
TO me, Yeshua is "ALL together LOVELY (mesmerizing indeed!), ALL together worthy, ALL together wonderful to me..." (hmmm....reminds me of a song; to wit
Here I Am to Worship -Tim Hughes (Lyrical video) - YouTube

 

[Second Phoenix]

Wait, in order to be loving one has to create everyone that they can?

How many kids do you have?

That's not what I said. I said not creating something, not creating everything.

If God imagined Satan and realized he would rebel- it is not loving not to create him for that reason.

If I was thinking of having a child and they visited me from the future and I did not like him, could I ever claim unconditional love for refusing to conceive?

 

[WisdomTree]

With that said, I bet on free will. (mind you, betting is not the same as gambling.)




This is true, BTW. There is no proper name "Lucifer" in the Bible. Satan was likely always named Satan.

You can't bet nor gamble unless you have a level 30 Gambler-class skill.

 

[Messy]

Pssst....there is no Lucifer TRULY/accurately/etc., mentioned in the bible. Look up the original Hebrew for Isa 14:12 (u'll no doubt quote me...) & don't depend on KJV or any other subsequent version/translation prone to include (saint?) Jerome's "error." (from LXX, to Latin, to English...:o )

Oh so he was called Carl or whatever, who cares, there was an angel that rebelled, a cherub, that was not a man.

 

[marc32123]

So we have to grant your premise there is no free will?

Your question has a false premise. I don't accept the God created Lucifer with pride.

Gen. 1:31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.
​

Pride is not good, and therefore was not part of the original design. Freedom was.

This thread is actually an argument for the existence of incompatiblistic libertarian free will.

If Lucifer made the choice to rebel, why would he have done so. It had to be because something inside him made him want to. And couldn't that something inside him have only been there because he was created with whatever that something was? The way I see it, he may have had a choice to rebel or not (free will) but the choice he made was because of how he was designed. The desires he had could only have been there because he was created with them. How could it be any other way? That's why I really don't buy into free will, it just makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever.

 

[RDKirk]

If Lucifer made the choice to rebel, why would he have done so. It had to be because something inside him made him want to. And couldn't that something inside him have only been there because he was created with whatever that something was? The way I see it, he may have had a choice (free will) but the choice he made was because of how he was designed. That's why I really don't buy into free will, it just makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever.

At least it makes no sense for Lucifier.

BTW, having a "choice"--limited options with consequences for choosing wrong-- is not "free will."

 

[marc32123]

At least it makes no sense for Lucifier.

What do you mean by that?

 

[Rev Randy]

At least it makes no sense for Lucifier.

BTW, having a "choice"--limited options with consequences for choosing wrong-- is not "free will."

I'd agree that is not what I'd call free will.

 

[RDKirk]

What do you mean by that?

It makes no sense for Lucifier because there is no way he would not know that he was no equal to God. Clearly we see in Job and in 1 Kings and 1 Chronicles that Satan is fully subordinate to God.

Now, there is a near certainty that Lucifer did not understand what Jesus is (something CS Lewis alludes to when he says the White Witch did not understand the "deep magic" of the king with regard to Aslan).

I theorize that Satan thought that the Son, once incarnate, was within his capacity to dominate like any other man. I think that "to be like the most high" was a desire to conquer the incarnate Son, not God Himself (or more specifically, not the Father).

IOW, I don't see the Isaiah passage of the king of Tyre as history of pre-creation, but as prophesy of the time of Messiah. I think that the Revelation 12 war in heaven occurs some time very early in Jesus' ministry--perhaps right after the wilderness temptation. I think it was a done deal at least by the time Jesus began dealing with demons on earth, for by then they clearly know their certain doom--so the war must have already occurred by then.

 

[SwordFall]

....this come from? Seems to me, we should be discussing/keeping our eyes upon/etc., Jesus, not Satan. Especially since Yeshua won b4, at, and after the cross, as "the prince of this world has been judged."
TO me, Yeshua is "ALL together LOVELY (mesmerizing indeed!), ALL together worthy, ALL together wonderful to me..." (hmmm....reminds me of a song; to wit
Here I Am to Worship -Tim Hughes (Lyrical video) - YouTube

Well, this thread reads 'Why did Lucifer rebel', I just assumed that's what I should speak on

But I do see what you are saying. Nonetheless, it also important for us to know what Jesus won against, and what we need to recognize so that we understand our natures contrary to God.
A key way to do that is to expound on Satan himself, it all began with his fall, which would be our fall as well.

 

[HIM_In_Me_In_HIM]

:o

If Lucifer made the choice to rebel, why would he have done so. It had to be because something inside him made him want to. And couldn't that something inside him have only been there because he was created with whatever that something was? The way I see it, he may have had a choice to rebel or not (free will) but the choice he made was because of how he was designed. The desires he had could only have been there because he was created with them. How could it be any other way? That's why I really don't buy into free will, it just makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever.

Oh....so u're saying that anything/something can be "created" w/out GOD, perchance? u and how many we wonder, hmmm??

 

[HIM_In_Me_In_HIM]

Well, this thread reads 'Why did Lucifer rebel', I just assumed that's what I should speak on

But I do see what you are saying. Nonetheless, it also important for us to know what Jesus won against, and what we need to recognize so that we understand our natures contrary to God.
A key way to do that is to expound on Satan himself, it all began with his fall, which would be our fall as well.

One of the reasons we (as Christians) have "trouble witnessing" to unbelievers be they atheists, muslims, jews, (rel to Yeshua, of course) is our lack of ACCURACY and penchant for fairy-tale type stories. We have to clean up KJV, NIV, et al versions if we are to have more validity in our speaking/teaching "The Word." I know, 'cuz i'm out there/here on the "front-lines" so to speak. "Gentiles" as we are known to some, are "trampling" all over bible, with "who cares" attitude on accuracy. U see it here on CF as well as "out there."
Don't believe me? u will. H>S> will show u as HE speaks to u with Rhema power, next few days/wk. Watch where "sloppy" gets us/u when u see it transpire before your eyes/ears. (Prophecy)
Shalom.

 

[RDKirk]

:o

Oh....so u're saying that anything/something can be "created" w/out GOD, perchance? u and how many we wonder, hmmm??

He's saying the opposite of that.

He's saying that Lucifer could not make himself to be anything other than what he was.

 

[HIM_In_Me_In_HIM]

He's saying the opposite of that.

He's saying that Lucifer could not make himself to be anything other than what he was.

Pays to NOT "quickie-read" when pressed for time & next task. tks.

He has an interesting POV on this, anyone agreeing or disagreeing w/ him?

 

[HIM_In_Me_In_HIM]

Well, this thread reads 'Why did Lucifer rebel', I just assumed that's what I should speak on

But I do see what you are saying. Nonetheless, it also important for us to know what Jesus won against, and what (A)we need to recognize so that we understand our natures contrary to God.
(B)A key way to do that is to expound on Satan himself, it all began with his fall, which would be our fall as well.

Re: (A), methinks u left out ["when" & "are"; o/wise, u imply a constancy that nullifies "our" Christian-label/seal upon "us," and makes "us" more like satan/anti-Christ himself/themselves. Brrrrrr......or is it, Owwwwwww....

Re: (B) I wonder if u've read/heard/seen some interesting(?), fanciful(?), etc-tales such as I have, or even (worse!) heard the whispers of a spirit (or spirits?) that (isn't H>S>, mind u) promotes imaginary "expounded" tales re: ha'satan & his minions??? What we know of him should be limited to what H>S> reveals "on a need to know basis". For this servant-son has experienced spiritual warfare that most here on CF haven't (as evidenced by their writings & coupled with the fact most "run {or hide} the other way" when confronted with anything even resembling S-Warfare; as u may agree, many are "in-denial" mode...be they 8 or 80+yrs of age) and has learned "the hard way" full dependency is REQUIRED to be on Christ and Christ alone, be it focus, energy, action, stillness, prayer, etc.

This servant-son isn't saying stick your head in a hole of course, nor letting "fear" dictate to/over "faith" but, again, methinks one cant stress this enough; Warning: don't go w/out Christ centered authority & (very important...) INTIMACY with Yeshua ha' Meshiach Just ask the 7 sons of Sceva (greek for "disposed/prepared") when studying/speaking on this subject, as words have power and your 'power' should be fixated on Yeshua's attributes, not satans wiley ways. Have seen many "get lost in the fog" due to opening "doors" they didn't know they were tinkering with.

Yeshua's Shalom upon all !

 

[daviddub]

Perhaps the whole issue with arguing free will is that God didn't say he gave us free will. He said he gave us dominion, which is an entirely different thing altogether. God is the only one who does, and in the nature of things the only one who can have free will. Dominion is the ability and responsibility to choose (think, speak, act) within a domain, that is, within certain limitations. But in order for a sovereign to give dominion (if it be true dominion and not just a pretense) he must determine the domain. Which means he exercises his sovereignty in a way so as to allow for real choices by and real consequences to the agent within that domain. So while free will would not have any restraints imposed by another, dominion would have precisely that. While free will is unimpeded, dominion is not. While free will must be total (all or nothing), dominion naturally must be limited. So then, if Christians would stop fighting for free will, and instead acknowledge dominion, this question of God's will completely nullifying man's, or man's God's would, I think, disappear. Also this issue of God's omnipotence is a non-issue, because although God is all powerful, he is also omniscient, and omnibenevolent. And omniscience knows that omnibenevolence cannot be brought about by mere omnipotence. Thus God says not by power, nor by might, but by my spirit. Or I might say it like this: power is not necessarily virtuous, but virtue is always powerful, and again righteousness necessarily produces life; but life does not necessarily produce righteousness.