"war in heaven" - real or metaphorical?

[abelisle]

We all know the reference: "Revelation 12:7-9 (King James Version)

7And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,

8And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.

9And 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.

With the new movie "Legion" coming out today, I am once more becoming aware of that most wonderful source of Biblical motifs/themes - the movie industry. Sometimes I feel like God is continually prodding us with all these wonderful Biblical archetypes portrayed in many movies that are ever present in the collective (un)consciousness (just an underhanded reference to Jung) of the masses.

But as for me, as a retired English teacher, I can't ignore or believe the official EGW estates stand that EGW wasn't influenced by John Milton's Paradise Lost. There are just too many references to this epic poem to make me think that either she took a lot of sneak peeks while no one was looking (but that had to be tricky since it was stored high up in the corner) Elder Andrews said, "Sister White, have you ever read Milton's Paradise Lost?"

Page 4

"No," she replied.

"Have you ever read any of his writings?

Again she replied, "No."

A few weeks later he brought a copy of Paradise Lost, and read to Father and Mother some of Milton's descriptions of the experiences of Lucifer in his great rebellion. Later on he brought a new copy which he had purchased and gave it to Mother.

She thanked him for it, and looked at it a few minutes without opening it, put it on a high shelf in a cupboard built in back of the stove and under the chimney support. There the book lay many days and several years.

or Milton himself was duly inspired to write what he did? We will probably never know for sure but the initial question still remains: "could there have really been war in heaven?" Doesn't the very notion/concept of Heaven preclude war? But Milton speaks of this event at length in Book VI. I continually advise my friends to read this work because of the wonderfully illuminating glimpses of what might have happened in the gaps we have in Revelations.

Most literary critics including the most astute Harold Bloom refer to this event as being metaphorical but how do we as Adventists view it? Our Adventist Commentary is somewhat vague but leans toward a more literal reading of the text. EGW comments simply say "Then there was war in heaven . . "RH Jan. 28, 1909

Alex (maybe I'll go and check that movie out?)

[BobRyan]

Ellen White states that it was real war - in real heaven.

"Might against might" and "strength against strength"

Rev 12 presents the same concept.

She states that this was Lucifer's idea - and that God gave the go ahead.

As we can see below - Milton's text looks nothing even remotely like Ellen White's description of the war in heaven or of Satan's condition while contemplating his plans to tempt Adam and Eve.

http://www.literature.org/authors/milton-john/paradise-lost/chapter-01.html

in Christ,

Bob

[SivartM]

I think it was more of a war of words than of physical strength. I would hope that angels are wise enough to know that words are far more powerful anyway. You can injure someone with physical strength, but you can't change their ideas.

[Robert]

Ellen White states that it was real war - in real heaven.

Really? Are we defaulting to Ellen again?

If it was a real war were there weapons? Did anyone die? Were God and Satan fist fighting....

Rob

[Nan]

About some things we can exercise the brain speculating but we will not have certainty this side of heaven.

(Translation - can each point of view here be treated with respect please)

[John317]

Really? Are we defaulting to Ellen again?

How can this be coming from a person who often quotes Ellen G. White as an authority? It seems contradictory somehow. Remember how often Jack Sequeira "defaults" to Mrs. White, and yet you apparently have no objection when he does it. You seem to object only when the quote is used to support a point you disagree with.

Quote:

If it was a real war were there weapons? Did anyone die? Were God and Satan fist fighting....

Even if the answer is "no" to all of your questions here, it wouldn't show that there was no literal "war in heaven." There was definitely a struggle between the forces of good and the forces of evil, and the language of both the Bible and the SOP indicates that it was more than a struggle between competing ideas. Satan and his angels were forced out of heaven, and they did not go willingly. Exactly what all was involved in this war, we won't know until we get to heaven where we'll doubtless learn a great many surprises.

[John317]

"could there have really been war in heaven?" Doesn't the very notion/concept of Heaven preclude war?

Not any more than that the concept of heaven would preclude sin and rebellion. Since we know there was sin in heaven at that time, it follows that there would have been disharmony and therefore a good probability of war. That war was transferred to this earth but it has its origins in very presence of God.

[John317]

But as for me, as a retired English teacher, I can't ignore or believe the official EGW estates stand that EGW wasn't influenced by John Milton's Paradise Lost.

Paradise Lost is unquestionably the greatest epic poem in the English language. I tend to believe that God gave Milton insights into the fall of Lucifer.

I don't believe Ellen White lied about whether she had read Milton's classic.

It's interesting that John Milton intially considered writing his epic poem about King Arthur but decided instead to write about the Fall. I'm glad he did. I enjoy both subjects but I definitely prefer the one Milton chose.

[Robert]

How can this be coming from a person who often quotes Ellen G. White as an authority?

[pnattmbtc]

I think it was more of a war of words than of physical strength.

[Gerr]

I think it was more of a war of words than of physical strength. I would that angels are wise enough to know that words are far more powerful anyway. You can injure someone with physical strength, but you can't change their ideas.

A third of the angels rebelled. That means 2/3 remained faithful. The language "cast out" was literally "thrown down" as used in ESV and a few other translations. While I would not be so dogmatic as to insist that physical force was used, it is entirely possible that two good angels would have been required to physically throw out one evil angel.

[pnattmbtc]

Force is not a principle of God's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order.

The war is one of ideas. Rebellion is not overcome by force. This is why the victory was obtained at the cross, and this is when Lucifer was "cast down" (or "thrown down," if you prefer).

[SivartM]

Daniel 7 talks about thrones being "cast down". I don't think that means God was throwing around chairs. :)

[Aliensanctuary]

About the word "heaven":

In the OT, shaw-mah-yim, translated in our Bibles as "heaven", is defined as

Quote:

to be lofty; the sky (as aloft; the dual perhaps alluding to the visible arch in which the clouds move, as well as to the higher ether where the celestial bodies revolve)

according to Strong's Concordance.

Shaw-mah-yim, then, means, in the sky, or space, not the mythological "heaven" we tend to picture in our minds.

Heaven, oo-ran-os, in the NT, means,

Quote:

the idea of elevation); the sky; by extension, heaven (as the abode of God)

We may be making a mistake if we spiritualize away the concept of a war in the skies above earth. This spectacular war between powerful armies in space above us will determine which power will control the entire planet.

Shot down and marooned on the doomed planet, Satan continues the assault until captured and restrained for 1K yrs. Upon his release at the end of the 1K yrs, he marshals all of the forces of evil from earth and space who are aligned with him to attack the City.

...

The first attack begins from space before the 1K years. The second assault, a massive ground-based one, occurs after the 1K years and the 2nd Resurrection. Fortunately, the LORD and his armies will rescue us from permanent satanic domination.

[Guest]

Huh?

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

How can this be coming from a person who often quotes Ellen G. White as an authority?

Now you know better than to state such. I never quote EGW as an authority.

You've quoted her in regard to her vision of children flying around in heaven for the purpose of showing that babies whose parents are lost will still be saved.

What you are doing, it seems to me, would be comparable to my quoting Joseph Smith to Mormons to prove a point I wish to make, even though I know he's a false prophet.

Quote:

I quote EGW for two reasons:

1] She agrees with the subject at hand and she states it better than I do.

2] Some SDA demand her before accepting a point of view. So I quote her for them.

In other words, you yourself don't really believe in her or in her authority but you simply use her statements to prove your viewpoint. Others you reject. She had some rather harsh things to say about people who did this. For instance, 1 SM 43:

"When it suits your purpose, you treat the Testimonies as if you believed them, quoting from them to strengthen any statement you wish to have prevail. But how is it when light is given to correct your errors? Do you then accept the light? When the Testimonies speak contrary to your ideas, you treat them very lightly.

"It does not become anyone to drop a word of doubt here and there that shall work like poison in other minds, shaking their confidence in the messages which God has given, which have aided in laying the foundation of this work, and have attended it to the present day, in reproofs, warnings, corrections, and encouragements. To all who have stood in the way of the Testimonies, I would say, God has given a message to His people, and His voice will be heard, whether you hear or forbear. Your opposition has not injured me; but you must give account to the God of heaven, who has sent these warnings and instructions to keep His people in the right way. You will have to answer to Him for your blindness, for being a stumbling block in the way of sinners."

[pnattmbtc]

Quote:

We may be making a mistake if we spiritualize away the concept of a war in the skies above earth.

I agree with this, but think we also make a mistake if we think the war is one won by force.

[Robert]

You've quoted her in regard to her vision of children flying around in heaven for the purpose of showing that babies whose parents are lost will still be saved.

[John317]

Quote:

We may be making a mistake if we spiritualize away the concept of a war in the skies above earth.

I agree with this, but think we also make a mistake if we think the war is one won by force.

You are right that the war is not won by force. The Bible doesn't say the war was won by having Satan and his evil angels cast out of heaven. But both the Bible and the SOP say that the fallen angels were compelled to leave heaven, a removal that they resisted. "He was expelled from heaven" (1 SM 316).

Satan fell from heaven twice: once from heaven, and the second time from being able to go to the entrance and taunt the angels of God. The first occurred before the creation of Adam and Eve, and the second occurred at the death of Christ.

For those who accept Ellen White as a prophet of God, who was shown visions of these things, here's what she wrote:

Quote:

God informed Satan that "he (Satan) had proved himself unworthy of a place in heaven. Then Satan exultingly pointed to his sympathizers, comprising near one half of all the angels, and exclaimed, These are with me! Will you expell these also, and make such a void in heaven? He then declared that he was prepared to resist the authority of Christ, and to defend his place in Heaven by force of might, strength against strength... God declared that the rebllious should remain in Heaven no longer... Satan grew bold in his rebellion, and expressed his contempt of the Creator's law.... Then there was war in Heaven. The Son of God, the Prince of Heaven, and his loyal angels, engaged in conflict with the arch rebel and those who united with him. The Son of God and true, loyal angels prevailed; and Satan and his sympathizers were expelled from Heaven." The Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 1, pages 22, 23.

On page 30 of the same volume, Ellen White wrote about Satan's being able to wait just outside the entrance of the gates of Heaven where he would taunt the angels and seek contention with them as they went in and out. Satan is no longer able to do this.

[BobRyan]

We are told it was "might against might" and "strength against strength".

The evil angels did no leave heaven willingly. We have an inspired account telling us just how desperate Satan was to find a way back into heaven.

But the "controversy" - ended in heaven - spread to the rest of the universe. Yet God limited Satan's access to unfallen worlds through the Tree of knowledge of good AND EVIL.

Only by choosing Satan over God - could the unfallen worlds be dragged into this war.

in Christ,

Bob

[Guest]

Yep

[John317]

she was not infallible....

No human except Christ was infallible, so the same thing can be said of Moses and all the rest of the prophets.

Quote:

She grew, but she only had a glimmer of the light that was to come....

Yes, you are right, but this doesn't mean what some think it does. It doesn't mean that God showed her error or that God will reveal truths that contradict either the Bible or the Spirit of prophecy. She was still growing at the time of her death, and so will all of us continue growing even after the Second Coming.

An especially interesting study is in regard to Ellen White's growth in the area of the doctrine of the Godhead, or Trinity. There are several that are available online. She was growing, yes, but she was never inspired to write false statements about it. She never had to go back and correct false statements regarding things that she had said earlier that God showed her about Christ or the Holy Spirit. What she wrote in the 1840s about the Godhead is completely harmonious with what she wrote in 1914 and all the time in between. Her views expanded but they did not conflict. (As with the Bible, however, this does not mean that there are not statements that appear to contradict each other.)

Quote:

I believe we need to understand the Bible.....

Yes, of course, I do too, but we should also understand what Ellen White wrote. I don't think it's a matter of either the Bible or Ellen White. Ellen White herself put the Bible first and said we should study it until we have a good grasp of it and then turn to study her writings. I believe God wants us to study and understand both.

It's apparent to me from studying Jack Sequeira's books that he believes the same, that we should understand both.

I can't see Jack's believing anything else, given the fact that he believes she was a genuine prophet of God. He refers to her witings under the phrase, "the Spirit of prophecy."

[pnattmbtc]

Again, from the chapter "It Is Finished"

Quote:

"And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night." Rev. 12:10.

Satan saw that his disguise was torn away. His administration was laid open before the unfallen angels and before the heavenly universe. He had revealed himself as a murderer. By shedding the blood of the Son of God, he had uprooted himself from the sympathies of the heavenly beings. Henceforth his work was restricted. Whatever attitude he might assume, he could no longer await the angels as they came from the heavenly courts, and before them accuse Christ's brethren of being clothed with the garments of blackness and the defilement of sin. The last link of sympathy between Satan and the heavenly world was broken. (DA 761)

It's easy to see this has nothing to do with force being applied.

Quote:

God could have destroyed Satan and his sympathizers as easily as one can cast a pebble to the earth; but He did not do this. Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order. His authority rests upon goodness, mercy, and love; and the presentation of these principles is the means to be used. God's government is moral, and truth and love are to be the prevailing power. (ibid 759)

The war isn't one which is won by force.

First of all, to think so is to misunderstand the nature of the Great Controversy. The Great Controversy concerns God's character. There is no doubt that God is powerful. It's not about that. It's about if He is harsh, severe, and compels others to do His will, which is why it is important we understand the nature of sin; specifically that it inevitably results in death.

Quote:

It is Satan's constant effort to misrepresent the character of God, the nature of sin, and the real issues at stake in the great controversy. His sophistry lessens the obligation of the divine law and gives men license to sin. At the same time he causes them to cherish false conceptions of God so that they regard Him with fear and hate rather than with love. The cruelty inherent in his own character is attributed to the Creator; it is embodied in systems of religion and expressed in modes of worship. Thus the minds of men are blinded, and Satan secures them as his agents to war against God.(GC 569; emphasis mine)

I find it ironic that with the examples of the Jews before our eyes in mistaking the spiritual for the physical, we so often follow in their footsteps, desiring, as they did, a militaristic victory of Christ.

Secondly, not only is the war not one which can be won by force, force itself is not a principle of God's government, but only of the enemy, as the above quote from DA 759 points out.

Quote:

Rebellion was not to be overcome by force. Compelling power is found only under Satan's government. The Lord's principles are not of this order.

[John317]

Again, from the chapter "It Is Finished"

Quote:

"And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of His Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night." Rev. 12:10.

Satan saw that his disguise was torn away. His administration was laid open before the unfallen angels and before the heavenly universe. He had revealed himself as a murderer. By shedding the blood of the Son of God, he had uprooted himself from the sympathies of the heavenly beings. Henceforth his work was restricted. Whatever attitude he might assume, he could no longer await the angels as they came from the heavenly courts, and before them accuse Christ's brethren of being clothed with the garments of blackness and the defilement of sin. The last link of sympathy between Satan and the heavenly world was broken. (DA 761)

It's easy to see this has nothing to do with force being applied.

Of course the above paragraph doesn't deal with force being applied against Satan. The example here given has to do with the effect of Satan's inspiring men to kill Christ. This has nothing to do with Satan being compelled to leave heaven itself prior to his coming to this earth. The language used to describe Satan's being cast out or cast down or expelled from heaven shows that Satan did not leave willingly. In fact, it even says that before being forced out, Satan had said that he would use "force of might" and "stength against strength." There is no doubt that he followed through with his threat.

There is no indication in the Bible or Ellen White's writings that Satan finally changed his mind and accepted God's decree that he would have to leave heaven. For that reason He was expelled or compelled to leave. This is not the language of persuasion or of a voluntary passing out of heaven. I see no evidence that Satan and the evil angels left their heavenly abode willingly. But again, that is not the subject of DA 761.

[Guest]

That's right John.